Shattered Vow

[Canoerebel]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Hi Canoerebel,

I'm not sure what you stand to gain by risking an amphibious assault into the Gilberts at this stage. Due to your early offensive into the Southern DEI, you've opened up THE front that you're looking for. This sideshow at Tarawa will not help you bring strategic bombing to the HI or destroy Japan's oil supplies.

Congrats on identifying and 'plucking' Tabiteau, but I'd leave well enough alone and redirect your offensive thrust into the soft underbelly of the DEI. The risk that you incur of getting your invasion ambushed and comprehensively destroyed is not worth the strategic gain, IMO.

Here's why I feel like it's a good idea:

1. The going is going to be slow and bloody in the DEI for a long, long time to come.
2. With the NoPac offensive winding down, the Japanese can concentrate everything in the DEI.
3. I'd prefer to have at least one other vector of attack, even if it isn't strategically critical at this time. If Miller is able to clog things up in the DEI longer than I'd like, I may have to consider opening a second front at some point. This would likely be in CenPac, and it would be nice if the Allies already had wrapped up Tarawa.
4. I doubt Tarawa is heavily defended at this point and the Allies have carriers close by. With the fall of Paramushiro imminent, Miller is going to shift his carriers to the DEI and he'll assume I'm going to do the same. They'll be helpful in the taking of Tarawa and I can put this together before the KB could possibly show up (I think).

[Canoerebel]

6/2/43 to 6/7/43
 
NoPac:  Paramushiro finally fell on June 6, 1943, bringing this bloody chapter to a close.  Bloody for both sides, but moreso for the Allies.  Without question it was a Japanese victory.  I can only hope that the contest had hidden, far-reaching ramifications I'm not aware of.  Strategically, the Allies performed well in gaining surprise and establishing powerful garrisons at Para and Onne.  Tactically the Allies didn't do too well as far too many supply ships were lost before they could unload.  Finally, I didn't count on the Japanese getting garrison troops that allowed Miller to put together a quick counter-invasion, nor did I expect him to take Onnekotan so easily.
 
SoPac:  Still mulling over Tarawa.
 
SWPac:  We have engaged in surface combat in growing intensity over the past weeks in the Port Moresby/Milne Bay areas.  With BB Sovereign present the Allies have upped the ante.  I wouldn't be at all surprised if Miller slips the Mini-KB around the top of New Guinea and tries to spring an ambush.  But the Allies have a carrier force at Auckland, so we'll see...

[Altaris]

In hindsight, do you think if you had focused all your efforts on just taking Parumishiro that you would've fared better? Just curious if you thought you'd have been able to hold out longer with just 1 base as opposed to 2.

[ny59giants]

Port size along with it's potential, amount of Naval Support brought with you, size of individual ships in a TF, and other planning and logistical matters that were not so important in WITP can be painful if overlooked in AE. Throwing away those small xAKLs and other small ships like the Dutch Navy has can come back to bit you later in the game when trying to unload at various bases or over the beach. I'm only 2 months in and I'm still trying to break some WITP habits that hurt in AE. 

[Canoerebel]

No, having a firm grip on Onnekotan bought me more time, though in the end not enough. Miller spent a month focusing almost entirely on Onne. If I hadn't taken it and fortified it fairly substantially he would have just committed everything he had to Para.

Either way I think Para would have fallen at about the same time.

What doomed me was lack of supplies and the fact that my CD guns at Onnekotan didn't rough up the Japanese invasion fleet like I had expected. Oh, and the availability of the garrison troops.

[Canoerebel]

I've detailed the major woes I've encountered thus far - strategic bombing in China, artillery death stars, and nucelar subs - but there's another concern that worries me even more going forward. 
 
Right now the Allies are in fairly decent position - June '43, Miller and I are locked in a fierce wrestling match in the DEI, and the Japanese are ahead 32,000 to 20,000.  But it's the air war that's really making it difficult for the Allies to advance.
 
The Japanese have lost 1200 more aircraft to date, but in the a-2-a category they've lost 300 less.  This is a telling statistic.  It shows that Allied fighters are getting beaten in nearly every engagement with Japanese fighters - whether the Allied fighters are flying escort, sweep, or flying CAP.
 
I am having a heck of a time in the DEI because my fighters get trashed.  I ran out of P-38 replacements, so I had to swap them out with P-40Ks.  My P-40s get beaten as do Corsairs, Wildcats, and Kittyhawks. 
 
By mid-43 I would have expected the Allies to be winning most a-2-a battles and Japanese losses to be greviously high.  That isn't the case in my game as best I can tell.  Miller has mentioned a few things in different posts and emails suggesting that he too is struggling to mount an adequate air defense, but I can't tell that from my position.
 
Until the Allies get control of the air I cannot safely move forward in concentrated numbers.  Instead of sending forward a big invasion fleet, right now I can only send out expendable little detachments and wait for airfields to get big enough to base massive numbers of fighters.  Base building takes time, so the advances will be slow.
 
Why are the Allies not performing at historic levels?  I'm not positive - it could very well be something purely to do with player performance:  how Miller trains his pilots compared to how I do so.  But Allied pilots seem to have low experience and not enough aircraft in the pools to replace losses.  By mid-43 I doubt the Allies were down to just one P-38 squadron in the entire PTO, but that's my situation.
 
I'm working on the problem, but the going is slow!    

[DW]

I had a look at another AAR, "Ranting" Castor Troy's (and the "Ranting" part is no exaggeration ", and there was a "discussion" about air-air combat.

Among those participating in the discussion, the consensus seem to be that the three most important factors in air-air combats are altitude, altitude and altitude.

Who ever is higher when combat is initiated gets the bounce and who ever gets the bounce devastates the enemy.

It seems that who ever gets the bounce so damages the enemy formation on the first pass that the surviving aircraft are fairly easy to mop up. 

It was also suggested that this tactic was less effective against very large raids because enough aircraft survive the bounce to effectively mix it up in later rounds of combat.  But, since most raids are on the smallish side, 20-30 or so aircraft, the tactic was very effective.  This held true for operating cap, flying sweeps and flying escort.

Castor Troy was complaining about how unhistorical it was.  While high altitude air-air combat was fairly common in Europe, most air-air combat in the Pacific happened between 10,000 and 15,000 feet.

But hey...  What ever works.

I suggest you experiment with this and set your fighters to max altitude for a few battles and see if it makes a difference in improving your kill ratio.

Also, if you've any old combat reports saved, you might want to have a look at air battles and see if you notice any sort of correlation between your successes, failures and relative altitudes.

Too bad about Paramushiro, btw...  It really looked like you had him by the short hairs for a while there.  Those unexpected troops he got really simplified Miller's response.  I think that if he hadn't gotten them it would have been an entirely different battle.

I know you said you did finally put some PBYs flying in supplies.  Can you tell me how many aircraft you put on the task and how much supply they were able to move?  I'm just curious as to how much supply can be moved through such means.  That might be important knowledge in upcoming battles.

[JeffroK]

But Allied pilots seem to have low experience and not enough aircraft in the pools to replace losses

I have found (up to Feb 43) that Allied plane pools are very low, its really only since 43 arrived I have a stock of Hurri IIC, P40K & F4F to play with. I only recently sold my SBC-4's when I got 30 SBD-3's in the pool. Added to this the "almost unlimited[8D]" pool of japanese planes makes it very, very hard.

IMHO, the Allied pilot exp is low because you are always on the wrong end of the attrition battle. You find you are always outnumbered therefore always suffering losses and so you are always replacing pilots.

PS. If players, either japanese or Allied receive extra troops to fight off an attack, they should be restricted because afterall, they are there to defend not perform an expeditionary force. Even moreso when these troops are basically "Extra Militia" raised to defend against attack on their homeland.

[crsutton]

I agree. My game is only at June 1 1942 but the biggest problem that I see is that a good Japanese player will mass his airforce on attack and overwhelm even the most concentrated Allies defence. I don't see myself getting the ability to counter this until early 1943 when I can produce planes on a parity with him. So the effect is that all things being equal, it takes longer to slow the pace of the Japanese offensive due Japanese air superiority. AE addressed many of the air problems of WITP but the biggest issue that I see is that it is too easy to mass airpower in 1942. All of this benefits the Japanese player because he has, better pilots, better leaders thus better coordination, so is going to win the bulk of the big air battles. Thus a greater chance of gaining control of a theater.

As with a lot of aspects of the game, the air system works very well in normal battles, but most of us angle for massive air battles and then the results get skewed. The biggest problem for the Allies is that they are just attritioned out of any sort of situation when the Japanese side wants to do it. I think the problem lies with the ability to put too many planes into a battle. There needs to be a way to get a handle on these large air battles. It is something that just did not happen in 1942.

What is the solution. Slower to build up airbases, longer to repair planes at forward bases and significant operational penalties for flying planes out of a base in excess of support. To suggest a few.

[Nemo121]

Well guys the trick is that as the Allies you can't face the Japanese schwerpunkt and survive for long. On the other hand you CAN nibble around the edges and achieve favourable attrition and you CAN stand up to the schwerpunkt for small periods of time at critical junctures. I will make a post to my AAR as I don't want to breach FOW here about my management of the strategic air campaign.

The end result is that my P40s are achieving about a 1:1 exchange rate vs the IJN Zeroes while my H81s ( because of pilot experience in the mid to high 60s ) are achieving better than 1:1. This is in January 1942. I do think there are a few tricks as to why this is the case though and I'll post them to my AAR. FWIW the Hurricane IIs I've just received ( I received the first squadron about 5 days ago ) are achieving about a 2.5 to 1 exchange rate vs enemy Zeroes. They really shred them. Even accounting for overclaiming I'm coming out at somewhere between 1.5 or 2:1 with those Hurricanes which is pretty good in January 1942.


I like the Air Combat model, there's a lot more leeway for nuance and skill but that does mean that if you get things even slightly wrong you can get butchered., If, on the other hand, as the Allies, you set things up properly your air force can be a LOT more competitive than they were in WiTP. The way it is right now I just amn't afraid of IJN Zero sweeps. I figure that if I have 50 fighters at a base it'll cost him 50 Zeroes to clear those skies. That's a pretty good deal to me right now.

The trick is that not every base is worth those 50 fighters so I have to pick and choose where I fight. But when I fight I'm confident I'll get a good exchange rate.

[Q-Ball]

I play both sides, and I am not yet sure about this issue, but interesting question. For sure, AE is an improvement, particularly in the areas of airbase stacking and uber-cap, which is definitely gone. So those are certainly improvements.

In general, I think WITP favored the advanced Allied fighters a bit too much. It could be AE doesn't favor them enough. Jury still out, but worth keeping an eye on. Certainly the USAAF shouldn't be scraping the bottom on replacements. I am not an expert on Japanese airplane production, but historically it does seem like the Japanese didn't really lack airplanes after ther early part of the war. They lacked pilots, trained air crews, supplies, construction troops, pretty much all the other stuff you need, but not airplanes.

In AE, there is a bigger gap than in WITP in terms of base force and construction troops; in AE, the Allies are WAY ahead of Japan, which is how it should be.

[Galahad78]

Just a newbie but, could it be possible that this "lack" of performance could be due to low level pilots in a-2-a? There are some threads in the forums suggesting that overall experience is only a factor when recovering fatigue, not for actual combat. Perhaps, due to the attrition, the pilots replacements could have a "nice" experience but su** at air-to-air combat, where you need them most.

Just thinking out loud.

[LoBaron]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

I play both sides, and I am not yet sure about this issue, but interesting question. For sure, AE is an improvement, particularly in the areas of airbase stacking and uber-cap, which is definitely gone. So those are certainly improvements.

In general, I think WITP favored the advanced Allied fighters a bit too much. It could be AE doesn't favor them enough. Jury still out, but worth keeping an eye on. Certainly the USAAF shouldn't be scraping the bottom on replacements. I am not an expert on Japanese airplane production, but historically it does seem like the Japanese didn't really lack airplanes after ther early part of the war. They lacked pilots, trained air crews, supplies, construction troops, pretty much all the other stuff you need, but not airplanes.

In AE, there is a bigger gap than in WITP in terms of base force and construction troops; in AE, the Allies are WAY ahead of Japan, which is how it should be.

I totally agree. The real advantage of the Allies is simple the ability to project power better than the Japanese.
You can build up bases much faster, have a greater pool of eng replacements, have an overwhelming number of
BF´s and so should be able to concentrate airforces in a greater number of areas than the Japanese.

To add to the issue with a2a performance:
AE handles a2a combat based on 2 main factors, thats AC performance and pilot experience.
The plane performance late in the war was not as onesided as it seems if you only look at it by
recalling the devastating results for the IJN/IJA in many of the late war battles.

AC performance and pilot experience is a major factor, admitted, but the real problem lay somewhere else:

- the Japanes never had an integrated air defense system, not even on the HIs
- they had lacking or non-existing radio communication and thus nearly no streamlined procedures
to enable them to react fast to different situations.
- they had not enough mechanics to keep a big number of fighters ready for an extended period of time
- they lacked sophisticated equipment neccesary for building advanced airbases with maintenance facilities

As a result they were nearly never able to fight on their terms late-war and where outnumbered in nearly every situation.

Some of this is reflected by AE (e.g. the lack of base forces and engineering equipment) other (like missing radio communication
and as a result no advanced group tactics or group situational awareness) is not.
But it is enough that a Japanese player is able to compensate for some of the above points, making the battle more even than
it historically was.

[Panther Bait]

For the most part, it seems that Allied players are also a lot more aggressive in late 1942-1943 than the Allies were in real life as well.  While the US/ANZAC forces were slugging their way up the Solomons during that time, this didn't really generate the type of response from the Japanese that striking into the DEI or Paramushiro would have done, particularly from the IJA.
 
Unfortunately the plane pools probably reflect that a little too much.  The small plane pools are probably a combination of the Europe First policy (heavy bombers in particular), and a low commitment level.  With their modest efforts they just didn't need huge number of fighters on the front line and probably concentrated them in training in the CONUS.
 
The Europe First reason should definitely affect the game.
 
The second reason probably causes too much of a disconnect with the events in the game versus history, or in other words, the Allies (i.e. the US) could almost certainly feed more fighters (particularly Navy and more Pacific theater specific planes like the P-38) to the theater if they really needed them.  In real like, they chose not to/didn't really need them at the moment (moreso in 1943, versus Operation Shoestring-type affairs in late 42).  So in the game, the 1943 lull sort of forces the Allied player to lay back and make modest plans or run more aggressive campaigns on the razor's edge.  Maybe that's a good thing, maybe it's not. 
 
An interesting idea would be to make the Allied player "buy" an increase in aircraft replacement rates with PPs.  It would allow them to tailor their needs a little more, but still force some choices on them (more airframes, more airgroups or more troops) without opening up the virtually limitless production that on-board Allied airplane production would bring.  Something like "just give me 100 more P-38's and I'll take the DEI back from the Japanese and end this by Christmas 1943."
 
Mike

[John 3rd]

This is what an AAR is all about (in my opinion)! Serious discussion of a specific campaign and its play broadening out to a discussion about AE as a whole. Well done Mr. Roper! If I had a better feel for the game I would jump in but my knowledge base is woefully lacking in this area.

[Q-Ball]

I am confident that the aircraft replacements are accurate for the Allies. Timtom meticulously researched it, and any questions that have come up, he has had an excellent response. That's not an issue.

As far as Japanese production, the Japanese player does have more flexibility to increase production. I don't know how unrealistic it is; after all, the Japanese made over 30,000 FIGHTERS during the war, which is about 650 per month. To hit that level, the Japanese MUST expand their production, so being able to do so is realistic. I don't think that's much of an issue.

There is no doubt that for many, like Canoerebel, the Allies are LOSING more aircraft than historical. Why? Probably to Panther's point, the Allies in AE are generally more aggressive than RL. It could be that advanced types aren't rated high enough to improve their survivability. This deserves further study.

It should be noted that almost every AE or WITP game I have seen is bloodier than RL, in all aspects. More combat, more naval fights, more air fights, everything.

[Canoerebel]

Thanks, John, and also thanks to you guys for chiming in with observations and suggestions.
 
I just had a big sweep/bombing mission scheduled to hit Lautem.  My fighters were coming from nearby Babar and Saumlaki.  The B-24s and B-17s were coming from Darwin.  I had all fighters set at the same altitude, and all bombers set to the same altitude.  Instead of going in together, they went in dribs and drabs - 15 fighters here, 25 bombers and six fighters there, etc.  Given the disarray I was fortunate that the Japanese didn't have any CAP this time, but I still lost something like 15 bombers to Ops.
 
The air war in AE is very challenging and somewhat frustrating.
 
On a separate note, I thought I'd comment about Allied transport capacity.  I have lost vast numbers of transports in this game - submarines, naval bombers, and Paramushiro's guns took the vast majority.  I doubt anybody will manage to equal my record in squandering transports.
 
And yet the Allies have plenty of transports as of June '43.  I have plenty to tote supplies around the map.  I have plenty of supplies at bases like Adak, Christmas, Tahiti, Pago Pago, Auckland, and Noumea. The level of supplies in OZ are even greater - huge.  The only place I'm having difficulty is getting supplies to the frontline bases where subs and combat ships and enemy aircraft and moth and dust doth corrupt.
 
So it doesn't seem to me that transports is a big issue for the Allies in AE even if you manage to lose ships at an exhorbitant rate like me.

[John 3rd]

I think the early-war Allied agressiveness has a lot to do with it. As stated earlier the Allies tend to start their offensive earlier then in the war. In some games there is a Guadalcanal-type battle where the Japanese are atritted down but in many it seems there is a go-for-the-throat attack in early-1943 that becomes extraordinarily bloody.

The other side to that coin is that many Japanese players will try to be even more agressive in the early stages of the war. I always am. This may have something to do with the airframe issue because there isn't too much transition between the Japanese continous attacks (destroying said airframes) and the Allied counterattack.

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: Panther Bait

For the most part, it seems that Allied players are also a lot more aggressive in late 1942-1943 than the Allies were in real life as well.  While the US/ANZAC forces were slugging their way up the Solomons during that time, this didn't really generate the type of response from the Japanese that striking into the DEI or Paramushiro would have done, particularly from the IJA.


Mike

Yes, but historically, the Allies had won air supiority in most all points of contact by late 1942. There must have been a reason for this. I just don't see it happening in the game until perhaps mid 1943 but we reallly have to see how it plays out as I am only at June 1 in my game.

Right now what I am seeing is that a skilled Japanese player can mass air assets and dominate any theater that he wants. It is not horrible and certainly I like it better than WITP but this has a marked effect on the Japanese ability to advance and continue advancing. Its just does not seem quite right.

[John 3rd]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Thanks, John, and also thanks to you guys for chiming in with observations and suggestions.

I just had a big sweep/bombing mission scheduled to hit Lautem.  My fighters were coming from nearby Babar and Saumlaki.  The B-24s and B-17s were coming from Darwin.  I had all fighters set at the same altitude, and all bombers set to the same altitude.  Instead of going in together, they went in dribs and drabs - 15 fighters here, 25 bombers and six fighters there, etc.  Given the disarray I was fortunate that the Japanese didn't have any CAP this time, but I still lost something like 15 bombers to Ops.

The air war in AE is very challenging and somewhat frustrating.

On a separate note, I thought I'd comment about Allied transport capacity.  I have lost vast numbers of transports in this game - submarines, naval bombers, and Paramushiro's guns took the vast majority.  I doubt anybody will manage to equal my record in squandering transports.

And yet the Allies have plenty of transports as of June '43.  I have plenty to tote supplies around the map.  I have plenty of supplies at bases like Adak, Christmas, Tahiti, Pago Pago, Auckland, and Noumea. The level of supplies in OZ are even greater - huge.  The only place I'm having difficulty is getting supplies to the frontline bases where subs and combat ships and enemy aircraft and moth and dust doth corrupt.

So it doesn't seem to me that transports is a big issue for the Allies in AE even if you manage to lose ships at an exhorbitant rate like me.

I AGREE! Lord knows I sunk over 1,100 Allied ships in our WitP Campaign and you KEPT ON COMING! I felt like Apollo Creed fighting Rocky Balboa. Nothing stopped you.



Nothing like tenacity...