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: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (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: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) Page: <<   < prev  9 10 [11] 12 13   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 4:21:02 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

On the Luzon B-17s....at start, the USAAF generally has more bomber units than bombers. Wouldn't it be easier to fly other 4E units to India, and disband the Luzon units? Eventually those bombers will be back in the pool and you can deploy them. You may actually have full-strength bomber units at that point!

Would save the PPs




That was my thought too, but I do want to use them to raid some ports initially to slow down Japan a bit, or at least get them to send fighters to some spots. So I am torn.

I am not sure how long an air bridge will be in existence to fly from SRA to India that could accommodate B17s, so that means shipping from East Coast, to Cape Town and there to India. A long trip. The Philippine B17 can get there a month sooner.

I am not 100% versed in off map movement. I read the manual, remember a fair number of tips from Bullwinkle and NYgiants, but for the life of me I can't find rough movement times from area to area or off map location to on map entry point.


You can easily fly some units to India in December; Hawaii--Canton Island--Suva--Brisbane--Darwin--Soerbaya--Trincomalee. You don't really have to wait for planes to repair, you can just disband them. Much faster than shipping to Capetown, plus a sub can't get them.

Shorter range units have to be shipped, but on Dec 7 in most scenarios there is a Fighter Group and Bomber group in Eastern US ready to go

_____________________________


(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 301
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 4:28:06 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
One of the off the wall tactics I will be pursing in this game is to encourage Partisan attacks.

One method I will be pursuing is to bomb the ground units at rear area bases that hopefully have garrison requirements to encourage Partisan attacks.

It is my understanding, if the Partisan attack does damage....well then all sort of good things happen. There is no supply transited thru that hex (this might only need a 1 vp loss and partisans might not have to cause damage -- can't remember) and 10% of the supplies are destroyed.

The chance of a partisan attack is tied into how far below the garrison the AV drops. Japan has a lot of bases that need garrisons, and a lot are on important supply routes...so supplies might be forced off road/rail and incur greater wastage too. Not all the time of course...dependent upon terrain, etc, etc.


Can you see the JFB wondering why in the world I would be pursuing such a strange tactic...I think they would assign it to experience farming or spreading the defense.

Some bases, like Moulmein (pictured) will most likely have strong garrisons and encouraging partisans there won't be too succesful, but airfield attacks can destroy supply stockpiles, and port attacks can destroy fuel....

Decent recon and the rule of 30 will help in estimating raw av at these bases, but I am unaware of any legitimate Allied source of understanding the Japanese garrison requirements. Is there one? Otherwise I will have to use common sense
estimates...

Just double checked...partisan damage inflicted is needed to stop supply transit thru hex only...I remembered it incorrectly. But 1vp and 10% supply loss occurs even without partisans causing damage...just need to get an attack.










Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 7/27/2020 5:29:10 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 302
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 4:30:29 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

On the Luzon B-17s....at start, the USAAF generally has more bomber units than bombers. Wouldn't it be easier to fly other 4E units to India, and disband the Luzon units? Eventually those bombers will be back in the pool and you can deploy them. You may actually have full-strength bomber units at that point!

Would save the PPs




That was my thought too, but I do want to use them to raid some ports initially to slow down Japan a bit, or at least get them to send fighters to some spots. So I am torn.

I am not sure how long an air bridge will be in existence to fly from SRA to India that could accommodate B17s, so that means shipping from East Coast, to Cape Town and there to India. A long trip. The Philippine B17 can get there a month sooner.

I am not 100% versed in off map movement. I read the manual, remember a fair number of tips from Bullwinkle and NYgiants, but for the life of me I can't find rough movement times from area to area or off map location to on map entry point.


Look for Table 6.2.10.3 of the manual.

TFs in their holding boxes can be accessed and the TF screen gives the number of days to reach the destination.

Alfred

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 303
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 4:33:31 PM   
Lowpe


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

On the Luzon B-17s....at start, the USAAF generally has more bomber units than bombers. Wouldn't it be easier to fly other 4E units to India, and disband the Luzon units? Eventually those bombers will be back in the pool and you can deploy them. You may actually have full-strength bomber units at that point!

Would save the PPs




That was my thought too, but I do want to use them to raid some ports initially to slow down Japan a bit, or at least get them to send fighters to some spots. So I am torn.

I am not sure how long an air bridge will be in existence to fly from SRA to India that could accommodate B17s, so that means shipping from East Coast, to Cape Town and there to India. A long trip. The Philippine B17 can get there a month sooner.

I am not 100% versed in off map movement. I read the manual, remember a fair number of tips from Bullwinkle and NYgiants, but for the life of me I can't find rough movement times from area to area or off map location to on map entry point.


You can easily fly some units to India in December; Hawaii--Canton Island--Suva--Brisbane--Darwin--Soerbaya--Trincomalee. You don't really have to wait for planes to repair, you can just disband them. Much faster than shipping to Capetown, plus a sub can't get them.

Shorter range units have to be shipped, but on Dec 7 in most scenarios there is a Fighter Group and Bomber group in Eastern US ready to go


Do AFBs fly B17s into level 2 runways for transit without concerns?



(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 304
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 4:41:23 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

... I am unaware of any legitimate Allied source of understanding the Japanese garrison requirements. Is there one?...









You rrrrangggg ...

Bring up base list, display "All bases" (Japanese controlled bases will now appear in red) and toggle on garrison filter.

Alfred

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 305
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 4:42:07 PM   
Lowpe


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

On the Luzon B-17s....at start, the USAAF generally has more bomber units than bombers. Wouldn't it be easier to fly other 4E units to India, and disband the Luzon units? Eventually those bombers will be back in the pool and you can deploy them. You may actually have full-strength bomber units at that point!

Would save the PPs




That was my thought too, but I do want to use them to raid some ports initially to slow down Japan a bit, or at least get them to send fighters to some spots. So I am torn.

I am not sure how long an air bridge will be in existence to fly from SRA to India that could accommodate B17s, so that means shipping from East Coast, to Cape Town and there to India. A long trip. The Philippine B17 can get there a month sooner.

I am not 100% versed in off map movement. I read the manual, remember a fair number of tips from Bullwinkle and NYgiants, but for the life of me I can't find rough movement times from area to area or off map location to on map entry point.


Look for Table 6.2.10.3 of the manual.

TFs in their holding boxes can be accessed and the TF screen gives the number of days to reach the destination.

Alfred


I did, but there is no context for the number published -- or more likely I am missing it.

Does each increment of 5 equal roughly one day of travel? I am sure task force speed will improve on this SR number, perhaps substantially.

There is the old flank speed for off map to off map movement, but it feels abusive to me.





Attachment (1)

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 306
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 4:43:16 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


Do AFBs fly B17s into level 2 runways for transit without concerns?



Grrrrr!!

Alfred

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 307
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 4:45:51 PM   
Lowpe


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

... I am unaware of any legitimate Allied source of understanding the Japanese garrison requirements. Is there one?...









You rrrrangggg ...

Bring up base list, display "All bases" (Japanese controlled bases will now appear in red) and toggle on garrison filter.

Alfred


I did that, but it shows 0...I guess it is a preturn filter and once the first turn is processed numbers will flow like candy?





Attachment (1)

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 308
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 4:46:56 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

On the Luzon B-17s....at start, the USAAF generally has more bomber units than bombers. Wouldn't it be easier to fly other 4E units to India, and disband the Luzon units? Eventually those bombers will be back in the pool and you can deploy them. You may actually have full-strength bomber units at that point!

Would save the PPs




That was my thought too, but I do want to use them to raid some ports initially to slow down Japan a bit, or at least get them to send fighters to some spots. So I am torn.

I am not sure how long an air bridge will be in existence to fly from SRA to India that could accommodate B17s, so that means shipping from East Coast, to Cape Town and there to India. A long trip. The Philippine B17 can get there a month sooner.

I am not 100% versed in off map movement. I read the manual, remember a fair number of tips from Bullwinkle and NYgiants, but for the life of me I can't find rough movement times from area to area or off map location to on map entry point.


Look for Table 6.2.10.3 of the manual.

TFs in their holding boxes can be accessed and the TF screen gives the number of days to reach the destination.

Alfred


I did, but there is no context for the number published -- or more likely I am missing it.

Does each increment of 5 equal roughly one day of travel? I am sure task force speed will improve on this SR number, perhaps substantially.

There is the old flank speed for off map to off map movement, but it feels abusive to me.






Off-map to off-map is the same calculation as for on map movement. Hex distance/hex speed of slowest ship in TF.

The manual is silent on distance from holding box to off-map destination.

Alfred

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 309
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 4:50:21 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

... I am unaware of any legitimate Allied source of understanding the Japanese garrison requirements. Is there one?...









You rrrrangggg ...

Bring up base list, display "All bases" (Japanese controlled bases will now appear in red) and toggle on garrison filter.

Alfred


I did that, but it shows 0...I guess it is a preturn filter and once the first turn is processed numbers will flow like candy?






I said "All bases", not "Enemy".

Alfred

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 310
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 4:57:55 PM   
Evoken

 

Posts: 488
Joined: 10/23/2019
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Do AFBs fly B17s into level 2 runways for transit without concerns?



I usually lose 1 per squadron on the way but time is precious on the early war , i would rather have those squadrons on the frontline when needed

< Message edited by Evoken -- 7/27/2020 4:59:57 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 311
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 5:04:22 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Evoken


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Do AFBs fly B17s into level 2 runways for transit without concerns?



I usually lose 1 per squadron on the way but time is precious on the early war , i would rather have those squadrons on the frontline when needed


Time is not that important.

There are no B-17D replacements. Losing 1 per hop can add up, not overlook the disabling element. Even with its weak defensive armament, transfer losses may well exceed losses to direct enemy action.

The B-17E doesn't come in until mid 1942, at a low production rate, so one can't just frivously throw away B-17Ds which will suffer combat attrition anyway.

Alfred

(in reply to Evoken)
Post #: 312
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 5:07:53 PM   
BBfanboy


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


Do AFBs fly B17s into level 2 runways for transit without concerns?



Grrrrr!!

Alfred

I think that means "that is a bad idea"!
My rule of thumb for transfer bases is one level below what you need for the plane with a full load. So the B-17 needs a level 5 base to carry a full bomb load, level 4 at least recommended for transit.

_____________________________

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 Alfred)
Post #: 313
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 5:11:43 PM   
Lowpe


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


Do AFBs fly B17s into level 2 runways for transit without concerns?



Grrrrr!!

Alfred

I think that means "that is a bad idea"!
My rule of thumb for transfer bases is one level below what you need for the plane with a full load. So the B-17 needs a level 5 base to carry a full bomb load, level 4 at least recommended for transit.


No wonder Japan has it so tough! Most of you AFBs abuse the game system! JFB's never do that!

/sarc

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 314
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 5:13:21 PM   
Lowpe


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

The manual is silent on distance from holding box to off-map destination.

Alfred


Thanks, that helps. I always feeling I am missing something somewhere.

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 315
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 5:16:16 PM   
BBfanboy


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

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Dec 7th Pre Turn PP expenditures:

100 points total: 8 Corp Commander switches in China

Dec 9th Turn PP:

254th Armored Bde 5 points
CNAC Transport Sqdrn 50 points
Remainder: HQ and Corp Commanders in China

Dec 11th Turn PP:

2nd KNIL AA Btln 18 points


That is as far as I have gotten.

I am kind of loath to buy out units for rebuilding....rather let them die. The air squadrons on Luzon look nice, but all withdraw eventually in 42 sometime. So, I am tempted to use them from Mindanao and disband them.

The B17s though are awfully tempting to buy out. 32 pp, they can get to Ledo very easily and start ferrying supplies once the runway reaches 5. Even Calcutta is only a 4 though...so they would sit idle training for a while. Or with poor pilots they can do nuisance raids against Japanese bases. On the fence here both options are attractive.

I am not too interested in buying out a full US Division, because I have a hard time seeing where I would use it effectively (other than India). I think I can hold off till January for shipping large combat units there.

There is a wonderful synergy in shipping US forces to Cape Town and once there deciding to send them to India or Oz, but I suspect that is a much longer trip than to Oz directly (but safer perhaps). So I am assigning a probability of final usage of Oz versus India. Those with a good likelihood of Oz usage will go there via New Zealand and risk the IJN interception.

I think I will be hard pressed early on to get the required shipping together for all the free units anyhow. Especially if planning a Marcus Island gambit.

I would like to have a few PP stored up as a reserve, and also perhaps to change leaders in Malaya, Burma and India to go along with my aggressive use in China. China is always going to need some spare PP for leader changes. Plus, then there are the naval commanders and air leaders that all need changing....this is probably where the bulk of turn 3 PP go.

Turn 4 I should be able to buy out more Indian/British/Commonwealth units for air shipment to China, or to risk a ship transit to Rangoon.

I think I am really going to burn thru the first four hundred points doing a lot of leader changes and very modest unit buyouts. I don't think that is typical AFB behavior. I can easily see spending close to 1000 points on leader changes in December.

What actual practical in game effect is there to be had in switching Kimmel out for someone with Nimitz being the obvious choice? I am not sure I see one early on unless Pearl is a battlefield. It is a Command HQ, and my intuition is to put in the best choice for all the hidden benefits as soon as possible.





I see nothing wrong with buying that transport squadron out to the China Air Task Force HQ, at 12 points instead of 50 (assuming it is going to be used within China or flying stuff to China).

EDIT: +1 on leaving Kimmel at PH. Put Nimitz in charge of an Air Combat TF and let your opponent know you have a Nimitz Carrier TF ...

< Message edited by BBfanboy -- 7/27/2020 5:19:31 PM >


_____________________________

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 Lowpe)
Post #: 316
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 5:17:06 PM   
Lowpe


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

I said "All bases", not "Enemy".

Alfred


No joy here...I opened up a different game and it shows "your side's" garrison requirements or I am doing something horribly wrong.

Although this particular screen is one I should check far more often than I ever do.

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 317
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 5:20:40 PM   
Lowpe


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

I see nothing wrong with buying that transport squadron out to the China Air Task Force HQ, at 12 points instead of 50 (assuming it is going to be used within China or flying stuff to China).


This was an old HR from Jocke days....no active HQ, have to spend full PP to change air squadrons.

Japan can really spam this. Not sure what the Empire is doing in this game, don't want to burden him with HRs but I feel uncomfortable doing it and that is what matters.

PP can really be gamed to such an nth degree...I just feel too uncomfortable to do it knowingly.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 318
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 5:25:17 PM   
Lowpe


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


EDIT: +1 on leaving Kimmel at PH. Put Nimitz in charge of an Air Combat TF and let your opponent know you have a Nimitz Carrier TF ...


I like Kimmel. His family continually tries to clear his name or reinstate all his stars. I think the Senate approved but no President has signed it that I recall. Mentioned this a bit in one of my old AARs.

How much does Nimitz cost to put in charge of CV TF? Is he even a choice?

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 319
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 5:49:38 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Just heard from Japan, and they are open to shutting the M8 to Sam loophole down.

Curious request, he wants to switch to PDU off. I am not sure that is possible without redoing all the already completed data entry. Anyone know for sure?

PDU on or off, I don't care and left that choice to him from the beginning. I am like Mr. Kane here and think it has little real game impact with the exception of perhaps weakening Japan's night fighter defense which may or may not even play a role in the game.

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 320
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 6:51:41 PM   
cantona2


Posts: 3749
Joined: 5/21/2007
From: Gibraltar
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Just heard from Japan, and they are open to shutting the M8 to Sam loophole down.

Curious request, he wants to switch to PDU off. I am not sure that is possible without redoing all the already completed data entry. Anyone know for sure?

PDU on or off, I don't care and left that choice to him from the beginning. I am like Mr. Kane here and think it has little real game impact with the exception of perhaps weakening Japan's night fighter defense which may or may not even play a role in the game.


I do not think you can change the PDU setting once passwords have been set.

_____________________________

1966 was a great year for English Football...Eric was born


(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 321
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 6:53:10 PM   
Anachro


Posts: 2506
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline
Nope, if you decided to change settings now, he'd have to go back and re-do all his turn 1 orders, and you've already been waiting for awhile. Not to mention, in some ways I think PDU off is a more complex game than PDU on for Japan.

(in reply to cantona2)
Post #: 322
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 7:18:33 PM   
GetAssista

 

Posts: 2732
Joined: 9/19/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe
Curious request, he wants to switch to PDU off. I am not sure that is possible without redoing all the already completed data entry. Anyone know for sure?

He would have to redo everything. Or just follow the designated upgrade paths himself while in a PDU ON, and trust you to do the same.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe
... I am unaware of any legitimate Allied source of understanding the Japanese garrison requirements. Is there one?...

There are none from the opposite side. But you can always load up a scenario for the opposite side. Garrison requirements do not change through the play.

< Message edited by GetAssista -- 7/27/2020 7:30:37 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 323
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 7:19:02 PM   
BBfanboy


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


EDIT: +1 on leaving Kimmel at PH. Put Nimitz in charge of an Air Combat TF and let your opponent know you have a Nimitz Carrier TF ...


I like Kimmel. His family continually tries to clear his name or reinstate all his stars. I think the Senate approved but no President has signed it that I recall. Mentioned this a bit in one of my old AARs.

How much does Nimitz cost to put in charge of CV TF? Is he even a choice?

Nimitz appears in the leader list in early 1942. I am not sure of the PP expenditure - likely the same as putting in Spruance or Halsey as the TF commander. I think he can be put in command of a carrier and that carrier made the TF flag.

_____________________________

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 Lowpe)
Post #: 324
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 7:39:48 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline
I think that it is 35 to 38 days transit from East Coast to Cape Town when you don't use your own ships.

West Coast > Oahu > Pago Pago > New Zealand or even Australia.
The shorter the distance, the less chance of damage or OPs loss, I do believe. Damaged aircraft in fragments can be disband into another unit at the same base. Excess repaired aircraft in the receiving unit can then be sent to the Pools. One plane only in the Unit to Australia and then it can take Replacements from the Pools. If the fragment gets repaired and can make it to the parent, it will try to do so.

PBYs if they can't make Hawaii.
San Francisco > Prince Rupert > Dutch Harbor > Midway > Oahu.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 325
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 8:45:12 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Thanks everyone, lots of good input there and I will pass it along.

I definitely can play voluntary PDU off if that is the option.

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 326
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 9:22:29 PM   
Lowpe


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy



EDIT: +1 on leaving Kimmel at PH. Put Nimitz in charge of an Air Combat TF and let your opponent know you have a Nimitz Carrier TF ...



I found Nimitz in the leader list...good Naval very poor air rating. So SAG group leader only, or command of a CV under a good TF Commander.

I found one reason to change Kimmel out, and that is that many naval squads (30+) are disabled, at least in my test run. Putting a better admin leader would get those squads back in shape faster thus aiding naval repairs. A squad if I remember correctly provide 2 or 3 IRP depending upon ship mode.

An interesting thought, would be to send one system damaged ship to Lahaina and Molokai to enjoy the Naval Support squads ranged bonus to speed repairs. Wouldn't be much 60 effective squads at Molokai and 30 at Lahaina once the naval squads weren't disabled....

Talking Pearl repairs, I always seem to prioritize getting the smaller ships out and about. I find them very useful, while the battleships are pretty much vp generators for Japan early on. I don't feel any pressure about repairing them...just losing them. Pearl though could be an invasion target...so there is that, or having the KB hang around and bomb them into oblivion.


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 327
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/27/2020 9:49:09 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Anybody know the story of this unit? I read about the history, briefly, of the Cavite Base...trying to understand why it is unrestricted.

I recall Bullwinkle or NYgiants made it a priority for getting some of it and down to Oz as I recall. Also, it upgrades to a very nice SCR radar set.

The Allies seem to start with very few naval squads overall...and this one is at 200% TOE initially.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 328
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/28/2020 1:04:07 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Did some testing, and Kimmel absolutely has to go. Actually, a pretty high importance on this. Maybe not with Nimitz though.

I am really burning thru the PP in changing leaders. I think I might have doubled my earlier estimate now....maybe tripled. Ugh. Need to do some critical pathing here. No point in changing leaders if I can't fully use them at start.





< Message edited by Lowpe -- 7/28/2020 1:11:28 AM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 329
RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) - 7/28/2020 1:30:34 AM   
rustysi


Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline
There are a number of Allied air units that may be withdrawn early on for PP's. AFAIK they'll be withdrawn eventually, and I doubt their training is any good.

As I don't play the Allies I've no idea if its worth it or not. Something to think about if you are not aware.

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 330
Page:   <<   < prev  9 10 [11] 12 13   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A) Page: <<   < prev  9 10 [11] 12 13   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

0.719