
Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies)
Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition
- seydlitz_slith
- Posts: 2036
- Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2002 6:13 am
- Location: Danville, IL
RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies)
Pretty much the same deal with the aircraft factories there...


- Attachments
-
- gifu1acfac.jpg (227.27 KiB) Viewed 374 times
- seydlitz_slith
- Posts: 2036
- Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2002 6:13 am
- Location: Danville, IL
RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies)
The culprit seems to be a lack of supply at Gifu. Since there aren't very many troops based here, the required supply is very low, much lower than the 1000 points per turn per repair point needed for each factory. I must manually increase this by requesting about 16000+ supplies using the arrow feature to address this problem. Otherwise the war will end before these factories get repaired and I really need these engines.


- Attachments
-
- gifunote..pairfac.jpg (219.96 KiB) Viewed 374 times
- seydlitz_slith
- Posts: 2036
- Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2002 6:13 am
- Location: Danville, IL
RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies)
While I am fixing this, I notice that I have not scheduled enough HA-34 engine construction to support the Helen I that will be arriving in April. I decide to expand the factory to 80 engines per month. This still may not be enough but I don't have another factory to use and I certainly don't want to pay the next increment of HI and supply to expand another 70.


- Attachments
-
- ha34hele..shortage.jpg (219.28 KiB) Viewed 374 times
- seydlitz_slith
- Posts: 2036
- Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2002 6:13 am
- Location: Danville, IL
RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies)
Elsewhere, some fighting continues in China
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at 71,55
Japanese Shock attack
Attacking force 1316 troops, 4 guns, 41 vehicles, Assault Value = 38
Defending force 5362 troops, 32 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 58
Japanese adjusted assault: 66
Allied adjusted defense: 15
Japanese assault odds: 4 to 1
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(-), morale(-), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker: shock(+), leaders(+)
Japanese ground losses:
11 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Vehicles lost 2 (0 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
842 casualties reported
Squads: 65 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 90 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 3 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Units retreated 1
Defeated Allied Units Retreating!
Assaulting units:
22nd Recon Regiment
Defending units:
52nd Chinese Corps
And at Tarakan, I attacked but still could not make progress.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Tarakan (67,91)
Japanese Shock attack
Attacking force 1071 troops, 6 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 37
Defending force 2046 troops, 56 guns, 7 vehicles, Assault Value = 21
Japanese adjusted assault: 34
Allied adjusted defense: 19
Japanese assault odds: 1 to 1 (fort level 0)
Japanese Assault reduces fortifications to 0
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(-), disruption(-), preparation(-)
experience(-)
Attacker: shock(+)
Japanese ground losses:
67 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Allied ground losses:
59 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 8 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Assaulting units:
I/81st Naval Guard Unit
III/81st Naval Guard Unit
Defending units:
VII KNIL Battalion
Tarakan Coastal Gun Battalion
Tarakan Base Force
On Luzon I began my assault on Cabantuan which will continue through next turn.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Cabanatuan (80,76)
Japanese Shock attack
Attacking force 1728 troops, 32 guns, 129 vehicles, Assault Value = 261
Defending force 2505 troops, 40 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 85
Japanese adjusted assault: 55
Allied adjusted defense: 19
Japanese assault odds: 2 to 1 (fort level 1)
Japanese Assault reduces fortifications to 0
Combat modifiers
Defender: leaders(+), experience(-)
Attacker: shock(+)
Japanese ground losses:
Vehicles lost 2 (0 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
996 casualties reported
Squads: 4 destroyed, 55 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 50 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Assaulting units:
7th Tank Regiment
Tanaka Detachment
2nd Tank Regiment
4th Tank Regiment
Yokosuka 1st SNLF
8th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
15th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
Defending units:
91st PA Infantry Division
These PA infantry divisions are extremely brittle and normally break at the first sight of my tanks. Pretty pathetic if you consider how weak Japanese armor is.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at 71,55
Japanese Shock attack
Attacking force 1316 troops, 4 guns, 41 vehicles, Assault Value = 38
Defending force 5362 troops, 32 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 58
Japanese adjusted assault: 66
Allied adjusted defense: 15
Japanese assault odds: 4 to 1
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(-), morale(-), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker: shock(+), leaders(+)
Japanese ground losses:
11 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Vehicles lost 2 (0 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
842 casualties reported
Squads: 65 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 90 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 3 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Units retreated 1
Defeated Allied Units Retreating!
Assaulting units:
22nd Recon Regiment
Defending units:
52nd Chinese Corps
And at Tarakan, I attacked but still could not make progress.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Tarakan (67,91)
Japanese Shock attack
Attacking force 1071 troops, 6 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 37
Defending force 2046 troops, 56 guns, 7 vehicles, Assault Value = 21
Japanese adjusted assault: 34
Allied adjusted defense: 19
Japanese assault odds: 1 to 1 (fort level 0)
Japanese Assault reduces fortifications to 0
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(-), disruption(-), preparation(-)
experience(-)
Attacker: shock(+)
Japanese ground losses:
67 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Allied ground losses:
59 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 8 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Assaulting units:
I/81st Naval Guard Unit
III/81st Naval Guard Unit
Defending units:
VII KNIL Battalion
Tarakan Coastal Gun Battalion
Tarakan Base Force
On Luzon I began my assault on Cabantuan which will continue through next turn.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Cabanatuan (80,76)
Japanese Shock attack
Attacking force 1728 troops, 32 guns, 129 vehicles, Assault Value = 261
Defending force 2505 troops, 40 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 85
Japanese adjusted assault: 55
Allied adjusted defense: 19
Japanese assault odds: 2 to 1 (fort level 1)
Japanese Assault reduces fortifications to 0
Combat modifiers
Defender: leaders(+), experience(-)
Attacker: shock(+)
Japanese ground losses:
Vehicles lost 2 (0 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
996 casualties reported
Squads: 4 destroyed, 55 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 50 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Assaulting units:
7th Tank Regiment
Tanaka Detachment
2nd Tank Regiment
4th Tank Regiment
Yokosuka 1st SNLF
8th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
15th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
Defending units:
91st PA Infantry Division
These PA infantry divisions are extremely brittle and normally break at the first sight of my tanks. Pretty pathetic if you consider how weak Japanese armor is.

- Attachments
-
- sitrepluzon.jpg (183.52 KiB) Viewed 374 times
- seydlitz_slith
- Posts: 2036
- Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2002 6:13 am
- Location: Danville, IL
RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies)
Finally, I landed unopposed at Hollandia this turn. We will raise the flag next turn.
The plots have been done and returned to my opponent. He should have the next turn back to me tomorrow evening.

The plots have been done and returned to my opponent. He should have the next turn back to me tomorrow evening.

- Attachments
-
- sitrephollandia.jpg (345.42 KiB) Viewed 374 times
RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies)
ORIGINAL: seydlitz
While I am fixing this, I notice that I have not scheduled enough HA-34 engine construction to support the Helen I that will be arriving in April. I decide to expand the factory to 80 engines per month. This still may not be enough but I don't have another factory to use and I certainly don't want to pay the next increment of HI and supply to expand another 70.
![]()
Just curious but what planes will you upgrade to Helens? I dont see any Helen groups until 43...

- Attachments
-
- Clipboard01.jpg (84.66 KiB) Viewed 374 times

Check out my mod for Strategic Command American Civil War!
https://forums.matrixgames.com/viewtopic.php?t=413785
- castor troy
- Posts: 14331
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
- Location: Austria
RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies)
ORIGINAL: seydlitz
Somehow I felt like the U.S. Carriers that sat off the coast of Vietnam during that conflict only the KB didn't have the restrictive rules of engagement.
As soon as the sweep was through, the main KB bomber package came in weapons hot and bombed the airfield.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Bikin , at 117,42
Weather in hex: Thunderstorms
Raid detected at 200 NM, estimated altitude 26,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 66 minutes
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 62
B5N2 Kate x 83
D3A1 Val x 80
Allied aircraft
I-16m24 x 1
Japanese aircraft losses
B5N2 Kate: 4 damaged
D3A1 Val: 28 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
I-16m24: 1 destroyed
I-16m24: 1 destroyed on ground
SB-2: 1 destroyed on ground
Airbase hits 5
Airbase supply hits 4
Runway hits 38
![]()
hit rate of KB´s bombers is pretty pathetic it seems. Is this the norm?
RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies)
Thunderstorms will do that to your air attacks...
Then out spake brave Horatius, The Captain of the gate:
"To every man upon this earth death cometh soon or late.
And how can man die better Than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his fathers, And the temples of his Gods."
"To every man upon this earth death cometh soon or late.
And how can man die better Than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his fathers, And the temples of his Gods."
- seydlitz_slith
- Posts: 2036
- Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2002 6:13 am
- Location: Danville, IL
RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies)
Just curious but what planes will you upgrade to Helens? I dont see any Helen groups until 43...
We have PDU on so I will use the Helens in bomber groups that I want to use for ASW. Most likely I will change out the Sally Ic and some Lily groups to Helen.
- seydlitz_slith
- Posts: 2036
- Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2002 6:13 am
- Location: Danville, IL
RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies)
hit rate of KB´s bombers is pretty pathetic it seems. Is this the norm? ]
Yes, it has been what I have seen all game with both the KB and LBA even when bombing from as low as 5000 ft. I figure that I really am doing more damage and the FOW factor is just not showing all of it. At least I hope so.
- seydlitz_slith
- Posts: 2036
- Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2002 6:13 am
- Location: Danville, IL
RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies)
I did fail to mention during my turn commentary that I have ordered an increase in Oscar Ic production to 64 from 32 and I have also increased production of the Nate from 45 to 90. I hated doing this with the Nate but I need replacements to keep up with the casualties and I still have over 300 engines to use up. As much as I would have liked to have just done all Oscars, there is no way at this stage of the game that Japan can supply enough HA-35 engines to build all the zeroes and Oscars that I would need if I had done it this way.
RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies)
Did you see any significant System Damage in the KB running at Full Speed?
- seydlitz_slith
- Posts: 2036
- Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2002 6:13 am
- Location: Danville, IL
RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies)
ORIGINAL: Takeshi
Did you see any significant System Damage in the KB running at Full Speed?
Nothing significant...yet. I do expect some though so I absolutely avoid it unless necessary.
I had one of my battleships pick up significant engine damage as soon as she ran at full speed early in the game that took several turns to repair.
-
Streptokok
- Posts: 159
- Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 4:02 pm
RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies)
ORIGINAL: seydlitz
I did fail to mention during my turn commentary that I have ordered an increase in Oscar Ic production to 64 from 32 and I have also increased production of the Nate from 45 to 90. I hated doing this with the Nate but I need replacements to keep up with the casualties and I still have over 300 engines to use up. As much as I would have liked to have just done all Oscars, there is no way at this stage of the game that Japan can supply enough HA-35 engines to build all the zeroes and Oscars that I would need if I had done it this way.
In my game Zero, Oscar and Nate pool went to 0 in first 3 turns [:(] so I had to keep producing Nates even tough I totaly dont like that. Still Nates make between 50-70% of Jap airforce and they suck so their looses are going to be high...
I ramped up Oscar production to swap as many Nate squadrons for Oscars, at least those with good pilots.
It paid out with 3-4 units converted, Oscars Ic in hands of good pilots got better results than what Nates would ever get, vs AVG Oscars did better than any other plane type (needed pilots with exp 85+ tough).
"No plan survives contact with the enemy."
- Field Marshal Helmuth von Moltke
"Nuts!"
- General Anthony McAuliffe
- Field Marshal Helmuth von Moltke
"Nuts!"
- General Anthony McAuliffe
RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies)
ORIGINAL: seydlitz
I have also increased production of the Nate from 45 to 90. I hated doing this with the Nate but I need replacements to keep up with the casualties and I still have over 300 engines to use up.
I think this is a big mistake GOOD pilots are more important than the air frames and engines. Too many casualties and you will end up with lots of bad pilots put them in Oscars and you have more survive and be better pilots.
Ben
Underdog Fanboy
- seydlitz_slith
- Posts: 2036
- Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2002 6:13 am
- Location: Danville, IL
RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies)
When I looked at my Nate units, some of the units are good, some are average, and some are green. There are some Nate units that will be in combat a lot, others that are meant to escort in low threat areas, and still others that will do nothing but train pilots.ORIGINAL: bklooste
ORIGINAL: seydlitz
I have also increased production of the Nate from 45 to 90. I hated doing this with the Nate but I need replacements to keep up with the casualties and I still have over 300 engines to use up.
I think this is a big mistake GOOD pilots are more important than the air frames and engines. Too many casualties and you will end up with lots of bad pilots put them in Oscars and you have more survive and be better pilots.
Ben
During the turn I issued orders to convert two of my best Nate units to Oscars. However, at this stage of the war it still does not provide enough replacement Nates to cover the losses. By being very selective about where and how I use the Nates I can still be quite effective. If I am able to use an average pilot in a Nate in combat against another aircraft that is slightly superior but with a worse trained pilot, or in an inferior airplane, or even on a combat mission where no aerial oppostion is expected, then I will be able to not only fly the missions, but I will also give that average pilot the combat experience that he needs to survive later. Sooner or later, all of my combat units will be flying something other than Nates.
I can not build enough Oscars and Zeroes to fill all fighter needs this early in the game. If I leave the losses unreplaced then I will not have enough fighters flying to intercept incoming bombers or to escort my bombers to their targets. Other than when fighting the P-40 or hurricane, the Nate can give a decent account of itself at this point of the war. Later, hopefully by April, all the good units will have good aircraft. But for now Nates make perfect sense.
RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies)
Keep up the good work !
" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley


RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies)
I can not build enough Oscars and Zeroes to fill all fighter needs this early in the game. If I leave the losses unreplaced then I will not have enough fighters flying to intercept incoming bombers or to escort my bombers to their targets. Other than when fighting the P-40 or hurricane, the Nate can give a decent account of itself at this point of the war. Later, hopefully by April, all the good units will have good aircraft. But for now Nates make perfect sense.
Love the AAR btw. I haven't seen all the reports but in the ones posted against the Russian the Nates seemed to get a caning vs the Chinese they are prob fine.
The expanding the Nates seemed very strange why not convert a Research facility of some float planes for while in 15 days you will have another 15 Oscars or Zeros being build per month. It wastes supplies and engines but id just forget using the engines those planes are death traps for your pilots hence the engines are worthless. Its prob better to let them hit the smaller air fields at least you loose worthless Nate air frames and not pilots.
t my Nate units, some of the units are good, some are average, and some are green. There are some Nate units that will be in combat a lot, others that are meant to escort in low threat areas, and still others that will do nothing but train pilots.
At least for the green units you have nothing to loose and its worth using them but the experienced guys id give an easy mission until they get some better planes.
Underdog Fanboy
- seydlitz_slith
- Posts: 2036
- Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2002 6:13 am
- Location: Danville, IL
RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies)
ORIGINAL: bklooste
The expanding the Nates seemed very strange why not convert a Research facility of some float planes for while in 15 days you will have another 15 Oscars or Zeros being build per month. It wastes supplies and engines but id just forget using the engines those planes are death traps for your pilots hence the engines are worthless. Its prob better to let them hit the smaller air fields at least you loose worthless Nate air frames and not pilots.
You could do this in stock, but since we are playing AE with both PDU and realistic research on, I am not allowed to change any r&d factories to active aircraft types. That limits my starting factories quite a bit and serves to prevent Japan from instanly expanding their ai/c production to a huge affair.
Remember, the only wastage is supply for the repair and hi for the airframes. I already have the engines. Yes, I am losing nates, but the loss rate is only around 1 to 1 and they have proved capable in many situations. Certainly far more capable than they ever were in stock.
Also remember that no matter how much I want to, I can only build HA-35 engines so fast. You also can not change engine factories from research to active types, and the number of starting active engine factories is very limited given the requirements for several distinct engine types.
- seydlitz_slith
- Posts: 2036
- Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2002 6:13 am
- Location: Danville, IL
RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies)
The January 2, 1942 turn started out with sub action.
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Jan 02, 42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submarine attack near Fanning Island at 174,135
Japanese Ships
SS I-169
Allied Ships
TK Eidsvold, Torpedo hits 2, heavy damage
TK Eidsvold is sighted by SS I-169
SS I-169 launches 4 torpedoes

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Jan 02, 42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submarine attack near Fanning Island at 174,135
Japanese Ships
SS I-169
Allied Ships
TK Eidsvold, Torpedo hits 2, heavy damage
TK Eidsvold is sighted by SS I-169
SS I-169 launches 4 torpedoes

- Attachments
-
- i169sink..eidsvold.jpg (387.36 KiB) Viewed 374 times



