Shattered Vow

[SuluSea]

Heck it's April 13 in my game and my china theatre is much worse than your situation.



It's only a game play Miller and give him some back eventually.

[racndoc]

Sorry to see your game and AAR end...Ive always enjoyed reading your AARs here and over in the WitP forum against John III.

A house rule that I have always used in stock WitP/CHS and AE is "No city bombing from or against Chinese bases".....keeps Japan from knocking out all the Chinese supply early on and keeps the Allies from ahistorically using Chinese bases to devastate Japan's Home Islands later.

This eliminates the JFB rationale to have the game engine allow utter destruction of China.

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

At Cox's Bazaar, it could be just a move to push out the perimeter. The Allies's best way to attack Burma appears to be through Akyab, rather than straight over the mountains. Occupying Cox's Bazaar might be logical then to establish a base to fortify to block a move on Akyab.

Well, I am beginning to think otherwise. While down to the last three northern most towns in Burma, I set all of their supply pulls to the highest levels in an attemt to move supply north to Myitkyina. Much to my surprise those three towns drained 200,000 supplies out of Indian over the mountains and into Burma in two days. Each town now has over 60,000 supply and it should all fall into the happy hands of my IJN opponenty. And there are not any roads leading from India to Burma! Obviously this is a major problem and needs to be fixed. If it is not fixed in the next patch or two, there is no reason why I can't move a massive Indian army force from Imphal back into Burma and start a land campaign there.

Historically, this was impossible but to my major surprise it can be done in game. I wonder what would happen if the Japanese took Imphal and Kohima and did the exact same trick. Sucking supply from Burma over what I thought was close to impossible terrain. I was under the impression that non road terrain really limited supply flow but no longer believe that. As it is right now, I see major problems with the ability to suck supply so fast all over the map by just hitting a button. I hope they are looking at it.

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: Swenslim

Chinise units were weak in life...so they are in game...dont whine. As JFB I can start whining right now that some green suckers on P-38 with 45 expirience have 4-1 kill ratio against my expirienced Zero and Oscar pilots.

No it just "aint" right. I am in mid Feb against a good Japanese opponent and he is just racing through China. Nothing works and I will be bottled up in Chunking or wiped out by June. I expect to get beat up in China but to be an effective game China need to be a "Tar Baby" that will suck up Japanese troops and resources. We will have to see how it plays out in the rougher terrain but I am not optimistic.

If I am bottled up and he is pulling troops out of China early in the game, I will not be happy.

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

No, I won't be enjoying the game if it turns into a fiasco in which China (except Chungking) has fallen and Miller loads up all his islands with freed-up troops that belong in China.  The game is already pretty close to the fiasco point.

I don't see him having the sealift to do this, as well as supply them when they get there, as well as keep the economy going. Islands only matter if he has airplanes to keep you from bypassing them. No resources/oil, no airplanes.

From what you've siad here and there, I wonder if you're using your subs enough? In late 1942 I'm getting 5-7 Japanese AKs sunk a week. Yes, it's AI, but it's the same code. Most of them are escorted TFs. I have yet to lose a sub to pure shipborne ASW. (Mines, air, my stupidity in sending S-boats out of fuel range to mine, and one sunk b an IJN sub, but no ship ASW.)

If VPs aren't the issue, and you've said they aren't, what does he accomplish in China by doing what he's doing? Nothing that I can see except wasting time, supplies, and armament points. Keep playing your game. Time is on your side.

No, you cannot compare AI games to email games. In my practice game against the AI my Allied subs were sinking 20-30 ships a month in early 1942. I thought the sub game was broken. In my two email games against experienced IJN opponents, this is not the case. They know how to defend against subs and the action is much more historical. In fact I would say the sub game is the best part of AE.

[SuluSea]

I just wanted to add my determination to fight on isn't a ringing endorsement of the mess that is the china theater, I'm just willing to fight on inspite of the poor modelling of the whole area which would include the kwangtung army garrison requirements, PPs and such..Whatever changes are made to the artillery , forts and such will just make it harder for me when I employ the very same tactics but I'm fine with that. [:)]
I can understand someone not wanting to continue the game under those circumstances but I like it best when my back is against the wall.

No, you cannot compare AI games to email games. In my practice game against the AI my Allied subs were sinking 20-30 ships a month in early 1942. I thought the sub game was broken. In my two email games against experienced IJN opponents, this is not the case. They know how to defend against subs and the action is much more historical. In fact I would say the sub game is the best part of AE.

Same here, No question when I started the game against Swen I figured my subs would have his transport fleet on life support by late '42 if the AI is the measuring stick. Playing PBEM against a competent opponent you'll find sinking ships by subs isn't exactly easy in early '42. Things are getting better but the road is long. I'm working on some tactics that will be employed as soon as my subs get their first upgrade.

[Canoerebel]

Thanks, gents.
 
I already miss the game, but from a work standpoint it's going to be good not to be completely taken-over by the game for while.  Perhaps I can get caught up before I begin again.
 
I don't mind having my back against the wall - that adds a tremendous amount of excitement to a game.  As I think I demonstrated in my WitP game with John III when he was threating to conquer Australia, had wiped out most of the Allied carriers, and had destroyed my ill-advised invasion of Wotje and Maloelap.  I took a licking but came back and won that game.
 
What really bothered me about the situation in China was that despite my best efforts there was nothing I could do to prevent a Japanese conquest of China.  I wouldn't mind there being a threat of losing China if outplayed, but when the game mechanics have sufficient flaws that it is entirely up to the Japanese player whether or not he will conquer China, the game is no longer an enjoyable challenge.  With China out of the war the game no longer bears any resemblance to the actual war.
 
This is not a complaint about the game.  I think Miller and I were the first to take a PBEM this deep into 1942 and in doing so we uncovered some problems with the game mechanics in China.  It's really cool that the developers are part of this community and play the game themselves and are actively working to address situations like this as they come to light.  Undboutedly there will be new things unearthed as the games progress into 1943 and later, or as clever players try unorthodox strategies.
 
 
 
 

[FatR]

No, you cannot compare AI games to email games. In my practice game against the AI my Allied subs were sinking 20-30 ships a month in early 1942. I thought the sub game was broken. In my two email games against experienced IJN opponents, this is not the case. They know how to defend against subs and the action is much more historical. In fact I would say the sub game is the best part of AE.

Japanese subs do the same to the AI. During the first month of war in my campaign they nailed more than 50 transports and a respectable number of warships as well. That's because AI doesn't even implement convoys early in the game - realistic, maybe, but easily exploited. A living opponent will not be so so careless.

[khyberbill]

A house rule that I have always used in stock WitP/CHS and AE is "No city bombing from or against Chinese bases".

My opponent has not bothered to bomb me from the air. The ground bombardments are enough.

[khyberbill]

We're not starting until patch 2 comes out either.

How about infantry? Do you have an AV limit or a limit on how much AV can attack in one turn? My opponent has 9000+ av in Sian and that is a lot of artillery by itself.

[khyberbill]

Why did you not try an scatter some ants to threaten the supply lines? If the ants got killed they would return in Chungking and in the meantime Miller would have had to hunt them down.

Actually, there is nothing to stop the death star from taking Chungking, so the troops aren't going to come back. I tried to threaten the supply lines early on and was slaughtered by the new pursuit mode. My foe would attack causing me to retreat and then the hot pursuit with an armored unit(s) really cleaned up.

[khyberbill]

Well, I am beginning to think otherwise. While down to the last three northern most towns in Burma, I set all of their supply pulls to the highest levels in an attemt to move supply north to Myitkyina. Much to my surprise those three towns drained 200,000 supplies out of Indian over the mountains and into Burma in two days.

And the Japanese can do this in China as well. It is quite easy to suck a lot of supply from the coast to the interior to support combat.

[Canoerebel]

I agree with the comment about the sub war in AE.  I barely paid attention to sub warfare in WitP - it just didn't seem that important (probably due to my shortsightedness).  But in AE I quickly had to change my ways - Japanese subs were killing me; so I employed lots of ASW and changed my supply convoy routes and began chewing up some Japanese subs; then my opponent modified his tactics in response to my modifications and the war changed again.  Sub warfare seemed very realistic if perhaps (from my perspective) a bit too bloody.  It is possible that the Glen-equipped subs make it too easy for the Japanese to sight and then home in on Allied transports.  I love the patrol zones and "react" features for both submarines and ASW - very neat and realistic and it signficantly reduces the micromanagement of submarines. 

[khyberbill]

I think Miller and I were the first to take a PBEM this deep into 1942

My opponent, Don, and I are in Mid October 42 right now. As earlier posted, I have called a halt to the game to see what, if anything, Patch 2 implements in regards to China. Also, I am trying to work with Don to create some HR that levels the field a bit. I suspect their will be a limit on bombardment in China as well as AV in combat mode during an attack. My other foe, Zach, hasn't tried to see how many divisions he can get into a square yet in China. We are in late August 42 in that game and having a lot of fun in China, Burma and at the moment, a large battle in Katherine.

[Smeulders]

Too bad that you're quitting the game, but I can understand that you don't want to play on under these circumstances. I hope we'll be seeing a new AAR by you soon, either with patch improvements or some house rules to keep China reasonable.

[Canoerebel]

Okay, you're way ahead of us, Khyberbill.
 
I heard somebody recommend an HR of one artillery unit per 600 AV, which sounds reasonable from what I was facing in the game - about 2,500 Japanese AV.  But in your game, with 9,000 AV, that doesn't sound like it would work.  Perhaps a combined limit of "active" AV in a hex plus the one unit per 600 active AV.
 
I hate house rules, though!  Hopefully these problems can be addressed by the developers.
 

[EUBanana]

No real houserules in my GC either, and the Chinese are being slaughtered by artillery around Sian/Loyang/Chengchow. The whole place will be smashed to powder in a couple more months. It is pretty silly. Not only the arty but the disproportionate losses in attacks. If the Japanese lose the kill ratio is still in his favour, if the Japanese win a battle you see 16,000 Chinese casualties for 500 Japs or something like that - hardly WW1 esque, "Whatever you do you lose a lot of men" attrition. Thats Wehrmacht vs Red Army in 1941 sort of killratios.

I am sanguine because our game proceeds slowly and I hope the patch will fix this and be out soon. China will be very badly damaged but I can live with that, the Allies hold all the cards after 1942 after all.

I think that in any game getting reinforcement fighters to China is important. You can do it fairly easy now, by having them travel from the East Coast to Cape Town and then be shipped over to the CBI. They don't need to be the mutts nuts, they'll be fighting Nates mostly, Mohawks will do.

[Canoerebel]

No, fighters won't help.  I tried that.  I put Hurricanes, AVG, and some P-48s in China.  They are fairly low quality and got eaten alive by Oscars, but the real problem was their short legs.  If you move them to a forward airbase to fight, the Japanese bomb the base out of existence.  That means that all the damaged fighters can't repair (no supplies) or leave the field even if they do repair.  So, a 16-plane Hurricane Squadon goes up onceand loses five aircraft in a-2-a.  Six aircraft are damaged and can never repair or leave that forward airfield.  So you move the remaining 5 aicraft back to Chungking or some safe base where you are lucky to have enough supplies to replace the lost aircraft.  You can't keep that up long.  It is impossible to employ fighters in China in '42 in any meaningful way.

[Altaris]

Sorry to see this AAR end, you're a great writer, Canoerebel, and as a relatively new player (only started this game after AE came out), I learned quite a bit from you. You have a real knack for conveying the flow of your thoughts, and in a very readable format.
 
I understand your pain in China, I'm playing in a 2v2 PBEM with China under my command. It's only Dec 31st 1941 in that game, and Japan already kicked me out of Chengchow with horrendous casualties a few turns ago. Not real sure how I could've possibly mounted a more effective defense in the amount of time I had. I had roughly 1200 AV of troops and 3 forts in Chengchow, about half of which had just arrived. Japan brought over a roughly 1800 AV army, over the river, and his river shock attack alone dealt me 2500 casualties to his 1600 or so. Over the next two turns, he shock attacked me twice, the first sent my disruption through the roof, and I took about 6:1 casualties to his attack. The second completely slaughtered my defense, resulting in 10K+ casualties and sending the remaining fragments reeling back to Loyang.
 
So even without a bit of bombardment, I got completely creamed, and this in the first 3 weeks of the game! I suspect anyone else would find this out too, Chengchow's not capable of standing to a concentrated Japanese attack if they come early. Which really means, there's no reason to bother defending Chengchow, Loyang, or Nanyang... it's just a giant death trap for Chinese troops.
 
Now, I don't mind that I lost the city, but when I get completely vaporized in 3 days time, where all defensive bonuses are on my side except the 1.5:1 underdog ratio of AV, there's something completely borked up about the way its handled.
 
I love the game for the most part, but the LCU portion is glaringly bad.

[EUBanana]

ORIGINAL: Altaris
I love the game for the most part, but the LCU portion is glaringly bad.

Land combat is just crap and always has been in WITP. Actually in AE I think it's much better than it was.

Hence why when people talk about a 'War in Europe' mod version I just go very cold. Imagine the Eastern Front using these rules. Talk about totally using the wrong engine for the theatre.

I don't really mind in the Pacific, there are no real wars of maneuver anyway. WW1 style attrition is fine, its mostly about sea dominance. China is the exception. China is always a problem.

The really glaring problem is that the Chinese are the side that always get worn out thanks to the supply rules! History is reversed.