Pacwar3 and Japs problems

Ranger-75 · Post by **Ranger-75** » Tue Jul 16, 2002 6:15 am

You can never have too many search / patrol plane groups in this game - I'm always finding myself short on these.

Jeremy Pritchard · Post by **Jeremy Pritchard** » Tue Jul 16, 2002 6:33 am

I was really considering adding some allied light scout groups. The problem is, is that there were not many larger groups of scout aircraft that were based on the ground. The primary recon aircraft of the Allies is the PBY, with the only other variant I have seen was the Utility Wing at Pearl Harbour that had many light floatplanes. The Dutch MLD did have some light floatplane air groups, as did the Australians. If you can provide some land based light recon air groups for the USN I would really appreciate it.

I just added 2 more E13A groups for the IJNAF, one that was based around Okinawa, and another based in the Soloman Islands.

The USN did have a lot more seaplanes, but their level of use of them was a tiny fraction of the IJN. Plus, most cruisers got rid of theirs after the first few Soloman disasters when they easily caught fire and made their ships pretty targets. The Japanese used theirs until much later.

BullHalsey · Post by **BullHalsey** » Tue Jul 16, 2002 8:04 am

Originally posted by Ranger-75

What about the US shipborne aircraft? The US heavy cruisers and battleships (and there were a lot more of them than JN ships) all had between 1-3 floatplanes on them too.

Admittedly, the Japanese used their floatplanes much more effectively than the US did, but the US still had dozens of such planes. - btw, I have no ides what type they were.

The US used the Curtiss SOC-1 Seagull and the Curtiss SO3C-1 Seamew on cruisers (other capital ships early in the war) and the OS2U Kingfisher for the Baltimore Class Cruisers and the later Battleships in the war. The Curtiss Seahawk was slated for a late war replacement- but there were numerous long-range A/C on hand (i.e. PB4Y-2's) which ship-based floatplanes less necessary.

Britain used the Sea Fox on cruisers and the Supermarine Walrus on the Battleships (at least on the King George V class).

By the way, what happened to the Short Sunderland inclusion to the British inventory?

The E13A Jakes are supposed to be a composite of floatplanes, but what about the late war replacement floatplanes E16A Pauls, E15K Shiun, and N1K Kyofu? Should the E13A have an upgrade?

I guess it is a fat chance we would see submarine floatplanes- like the Yokosuka E14Y Glen (the only Jap plane to bomb the US mainland)?

Sardaukar · Post by **Sardaukar** » Thu Jul 18, 2002 1:17 am

Problem that I have is the difficulty to push Japanese away from Mandalay..**** units just bounce back, then retreat to Rangoon..then bounce back...vicious cycle. Of course it's good experience bulder for me, getting 2000+ odds every week have really grown their exp. I just wish I could just get them stay in Rangoon, so that my land "juggernaut" would slowly push them back towards south. I think I could make amphibious landing south of Rangoon, but I have only indian division to it, and I doubt it can handle that by itself.

Cheers,

M.S.

Ranger-75 · Post by **Ranger-75** » Thu Jul 18, 2002 7:10 am

Originally posted by Sardaukar
Problem that I have is the difficulty to push Japanese away from Mandalay..**** units just bounce back, then retreat to Rangoon..then bounce back...vicious cycle. Of course it's good experience bulder for me, getting 2000+ odds every week have really grown their exp. I just wish I could just get them stay in Rangoon, so that my land "juggernaut" would slowly push them back towards south. I think I could make amphibious landing south of Rangoon, but I have only indian division to it, and I doubt it can handle that by itself.

Cheers,

M.S.

Make them retreat enough times and they won't have the required 50% readiness on the Jap turn to move back. It also helps to bomb the supply dumps at their retreat base (Rangoon you said it was?).

Sardaukar · Post by **Sardaukar** » Thu Jul 18, 2002 4:36 pm

Originally posted by Ranger-75

Make them retreat enough times and they won't have the required 50% readiness on the Jap turn to move back. It also helps to bomb the supply dumps at their retreat base (Rangoon you said it was?).

Hmm..why didn't I think that...my air force is bombing their land forces in Rangoon..but not their supply depot. Got to try that, thanks !

Cheers,

M.S.

Capt. Harlock · Post by **Capt. Harlock** » Fri Jul 19, 2002 11:21 pm

If you have any British heavy ships available, it's also a good idea to send a Bombardment TF to Rangoon. After a couple of turns, there won't be much left of any defending air squadrons there, and it will keep the LCU's disrupted while your bombers concentrate on the supply depots. You will also get a report of what the Japanese have there while the bombardment is going on.

I've had the "bounce back" problem myself on several occasions. I wrote to Jeremy Pritchard about advancing from Bangkok, and he recommended an amphibious landing at Saigon (?!?). For human-to-human games, I suggest a "house rule" that LCU's forced to retreat cannot advance back into combat for one full turn.

Sardaukar · Post by **Sardaukar** » Fri Jul 19, 2002 11:34 pm

Originally posted by Capt. Harlock
If you have any British heavy ships available, it's also a good idea to send a Bombardment TF to Rangoon. After a couple of turns, there won't be much left of any defending air squadrons there, and it will keep the LCU's disrupted while your bombers concentrate on the supply depots. You will also get a report of what the Japanese have there while the bombardment is going on.

I've had the "bounce back" problem myself on several occasions. I wrote to Jeremy Pritchard about advancing from Bangkok, and he recommended an amphibious landing at Saigon (?!?). For human-to-human games, I suggest a "house rule" that LCU's forced to retreat cannot advance back into combat for one full turn.

Yep...I was going to post about that too, but you got first. I was unable to force the Japanese to retreat fully from Mandalay until I did send both Surface Combat (I like them more than bombardment)and Brit CV TF to hammer Rangoon couple of times. Took really heavy hammering to prevent the "bounce"...and lot of time. Well..I don't really mind...considering the logistic troubles of that front.
Anyway...I'm playing with "max help allied"...since this is my first Campaign 41 game that I look to see to end...just to check how to play during 41-42. My favourite is Guadalcanal to end..as allied. And I have had PW since original Grigsby add on X22

Massive game..I still love it.

Cheers,

M.S.

Denniss · Post by **Denniss** » Sat Jul 20, 2002 1:26 am

It usually helps to cut off Ranggon from supply by land and sea so if you move some B17 to India and bomb Moulemien supply travelled by land paths will be reduced or even stopped .

Lokioftheaesir · Post by **Lokioftheaesir** » Sat Jul 20, 2002 3:09 am

"It took me about 8 month to get rid of 4 Div(3 phil + 1US) and two Reg(2US) without supply) in Bataan having 6 Div and 5 Bde with good
experience and good supply and good commanders."

Denniss

Have reached the 1st week of April in Ver3 PBEM
game with Varjager. Bataan fell in last week of
March. Can't exactly remember what allies had there(maybe my opponent can expand on this)but i put 4 Divisions and 2 Brig/Reg's on Bataan, set 14th Army HQ to ClarkField with army target Bataan and Hori commanding battle in that hex. Rather than let supply routine provide for my troops i also used AK's out of Formosa to dump more than 1000 supply a turn at Bataan by sea.
Used same system at Singapore which fell near end of Feb.
If you are playing against AI it may be a case of
the AI doing things behind the scenes to help it'self in slightly less than realistic manner. The AI in WiR does this.

As for Jap supply movement, half a dozen AK groups
constantly shuttle supply to forward bases (at the moment those that are launching attacks to take Indonesia,Balikpapan/Kendari/Singapore.. exct)
so there is enough supply there to be shipped to
LCU's that are in combat.

Loki

Sardaukar · Post by **Sardaukar** » Sat Jul 20, 2002 4:52 am

Well...since now in end of 42 I have lot's of CV/CVL/CVE to form 4 powerful carrier groups (max help allied) and none of them have sunk...albeit I have one CV and one CVL about 60 and 40 % damaged...I have been able to go offensive both Central Pacific and South Pacific. CV TFs commanded by Halsey and Mitchener pound the Solomons and Spruance with sidekick harass Central Pacific. This is all due that Bataan has not collapsed (bug ?) and Japanese Combined Fleet is hammering it daily. Tough guys in Bataan to hold for year

.

Cheers,

M.S.

Denniss · Post by **Denniss** » Sat Jul 20, 2002 5:36 pm

I saw allied units with good readiness surrendering earlier than units with low or very low readiness .
And with very low readiness(~20) it was not easy to kill enough squads to let them surrender even with 40:1 or more after combat .
I had enough supply in Bataan and my best commanders in HQ and on base commanding the operations as well as enough PP points .

Seems thers something wrong in the combat strenght calculation and units with low readiness .
A Bde with 50 squads some guns and tanks and readiness around 20 should have no chance against 1 full strenght/readiness Div and 4 Bde regardless of entrenchment and terrain .

boba · Post by **boba** » Sun Jul 21, 2002 10:19 pm

Originally posted by Denniss
Seems thers something wrong in the combat strenght calculation and units with low readiness .
A Bde with 50 squads some guns and tanks and readiness around 20 should have no chance against 1 full strenght/readiness Div and 4 Bde regardless of entrenchment and terrain .

Definetly seems ther is something wrong in the combat resolution! In my PBEM game it's middle of August '42 and Alliad LCUs at Bataan still holds, although base has fell around May/Jun... All the Philipphin troops has surrendered but Americans still hold against 4 inf divisons, 2 Bde, and level 9 leaders (in HQ and commanding the base). And not to mention that single Australian BN with 5 sq is still holding at Kokoda Trail at new Guinea (all the bases have fell to Japan long ago) against full divison and one NGU, also with good leader! And I thought that Japanese troops were supposed to fight to the last with great odds needed to eliminate them... It can be frustrating sometimes to watch damned Ozzies beating of whole division (with rocks I suppose)

Mika Väliviita · Post by **Mika Väliviita** » Mon Jul 22, 2002 1:33 pm

There's no problem in the code. Maybe the design has some, but as it is, forcing a surrender is hard. I think I wrote about this in "Ideas for ver 3.1"-thread. Basically you need 25 odds/terrain value for anything but atolls, so for terrain 8 you need 200 odds. (With some exceptions and special cases.)

Mika

Sardaukar · Post by **Sardaukar** » Mon Jul 22, 2002 3:47 pm

Originally posted by Mika Väliviita
There's no problem in the code. Maybe the design has some, but as it is, forcing a surrender is hard. I think I wrote about this in "Ideas for ver 3.1"-thread. Basically you need 25 odds/terrain value for anything but atolls, so for terrain 8 you need 200 odds. (With some exceptions and special cases.)

Mika

Ah..then it makes sense. Getting together about 4000 points worth of troops to kill remaining 20 is indeed hard. No wonder my massed infantry still holds in Bataan. I'm starting to think it as heroic stand of Leningrad

Cheers,

M.S.