Hunting the Hibiki: Q-Ball (Allies) v Cuttlefish (Japan)

[Q-Ball]

Combat Report, Jan 13, 1943

I am finally back from the Beef run, and had a chance to look at the turn. It was truly a disaster for the IJN. I thank everyone for the comments, too numerous to respond to them all and it's getting late.

Overall, I think Cuttlefish made some tactical errors, and then I got lucky. The tactical errors were not detaching DDs to deal with the PTs, and also staying a couple turns in range of Allied LBA. This was not fatal, but he lost so many Zeros that for the third day, there wasn't enough CAP left over those carriers. The fact that TF strayed was luck on my part, and in the end the USN CVs, which were completely fresh, finished the job, as well as fresh LBA I flew into Lautem the day before.

Based on comments, the result will stand, though I wouldn't blame Cuttlefish for quitting at some point; it's going to get real bad real fast for the Empire.

If there are takeaways for players: 1. Send DDs to deal with PT Boats. Don't let them roam around. 2. Every day CVs tangle with LBA they get weaker; avoid that at all costs.

Battle of Banda Sea: Everyone knows by now the broad outline. Apparently the PT boats intercepted the CVs, causing a couple ships to collide, they withdraw, and otherwise are in the wrong positing at daybreak. 5 USN CVs, plus TBFs and SBDs from Lautem, and escorts from Ambon, unload on the TF. In addition to Zuikaku, Shokaku, Hiryu, and Soryu,, the Japanese for sure lose Kirishima and Mikuma, and Hiei suffered alot of damage; so much that I should be able to finish her tommorow if she didn't sink today. Losing 4 CVs is bad enough, throw in a couple KONGOS and it's REAL bad.

I should probably rename one of the reinforcement carriers USS Banda Sea now!

What Next?: I had put Kendari on temporary hold, but we are going ahead with this invasion. I need to get some transports to Koepang to pick-up units, but we should be landing in a couple weeks. This will be followed by landings at Makassar.

[crsutton]

Well, if you give him a redo, at least make him pay for the cow. Fair is fair.......

[Fishbed]

Yes, and the beer too.

But I understand you may give him a redo. It's Cuttlefish afterall - and Ive got the feeling that in your guts you didn't really want this kind of virtory. You'd rather want to achieve this kind of results without the help of the AI logics, wouldn't you? Feeling a bit frustrated like if some odd guy had come to steal your candy? [;)]

[witpqs]

I don't see anything tainted about the battle or its outcome.

[LoBaron]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

I don't see anything tainted about the battle or its outcome.

Exactly. [:)]
War is hell.

[Fishbed]

Yeah? Well AE is about fun too. If the guys think their fun was taken away by strange mechanics, it's their right I guess. Q-Ball has nothing to be ashamed of for this victory, but I can understand him proposing a replay for the sake of the gameplay value of this game...! You can interpret it the way you want, but it is more actually the result of the AI being unable to plan a new route in a clever way than some result from somekind of fortune of war.

When Q-Ball moved his PTs on the retreat path of the KB, he was expecting to have the chance to give a shot, not get a 4-CV 2-BB TF get bounced back because of AI logics and routine. You may start to look for anykind of excuse, like Nagumo had diarrhea or somethin - there's random part in war, but this is just the AI not being able to re-route the TF through costal hexs and forgetting its primary objective - just like you may have damaged ships sent to some port closeby which would reroute at will to some other place 10 hex away. In a way or another, this event robbed a large part of the fun to come.

[LoBaron]

ORIGINAL: Fishbed

Yeah? Well AE is about fun too. If the guys think their fun was taken away by strange mechanics, it's their right I guess. Q-Ball has nothing to be ashamed of for this victory, but I can understand him proposing a replay for the sake of the gameplay value of this game...! You can interpret it the way you want, but it is more actually the result of the AI being unable to plan a new route in a clever way than some result from somekind of fortune of war.

When Q-Ball moved his PTs on the retreat path of the KB, he was expecting to have the chance to give a shot, not get a 4-CV 2-BB TF get bounced back because of AI logics and routine. You may start to look for anykind of excuse, like Nagumo had diarrhea or somethin - there's random part in war, but this is just the AI not being able to re-route the TF through costal hexs and forgetting its primary objective - just like you may have damaged ships sent to some port closeby which would reroute at will to some other place 10 hex away. In a way or another, this event robbed a large part of the fun to come.

Well if someone doesn´t have fun or feels rewarded by trying to get back on track after a major defeat thats the wrong game for him anyway. [;)]

As has been said repeatedly, here and in Cuttlefishs AAR, both took risks in this operation but Cuttlefish had significantly less time to prepare
for the situation. Operating his CV´s in this area with unknown opposition was a bold move, it was well planned, but it had some glitches that
made him pay. The position of his CV force in fact invited disaster in face of defeat.

The whole discussion doesn´t take place because of a bug but because of the dire consequences of operating CV´s in confined waters without an
open retreat path. PTs in a CV TF´s rear are a pita.

The offer for replay is a generous one. I would decline, but its not our duty to decide this.

[Fishbed]

Surely it's not, and surely I agree it's really generous [:)]

[witpqs]

Fishbed - Of course it is totally up to the players, and you are entitled to your opinion about the battle. My opinion differs from yours, and I was offering moral support to Q-Ball upon his decision to let the battle stand. I did this because several posters have offered their opinion that the battle was tainted by erroneous game mechanics.

We just disagree about that point. [8D]

[Fishbed]

sure, no offense intended or taken chap [8D]

[LoBaron]

Fishbed I have to again echo witpqs. Same applies to me. [:)]
For sure we are on safe ground discussing this from outside the game without the emotion
caused by a brutal result of a well planned engagement.

But I guess we all know the feeling of getting whacked in game already. (maybe there are some exceptions
but I´m not, thats for sure).

I´m just more the stubborn type.
If I cannot REALLY trace a lopsided result back to a bug (not sure but we probably both agree that this not a bug
but a combination of risk taken, luck running out and the fact that theres no specially implemented game mechanic for
this specific situation except for a general one that we all know of) I´d pay the price and go on.

Edit: edited SClomblination to look more like combination

[princep01]

I agree with LoBaron and witpqs. If it were me playing either side, there would be no redo. Any "redo" would come in the form of a new game. Cuttlefish made a calculated, but serious mistake in moving those CVs south of Ambon into very restricted waters. He was unfortunate in the outcome, but the mistake was his.

What transpired is entirely realistic and believable. It is not the result of some bug induced lunacy. Hence, live with it and either play the game out to its likely end or start a new one. The writing skills of the combatants have not been dimished. Neither have their respctive playing skills (if anything, they have been more finely honed). I'd love to see a rematch with acompanying AAR. This game is decided. A rematch would allow both players to start fresh with the knowledge they learned from this grand contest.

[LoBaron]

ORIGINAL: princep01
I'd love to see a rematch with acompanying AAR. This game is decided. A rematch would allow both players to start fresh with the knowledge they learned from this grand contest.

If you say that the game is decided, then 95% of the games here are - exactly on Dec 7th 1941. [:)]

Cuttlefish can still be a sting in the side of Q-balls advance. And if he is patient enough...there are always options.
Yes, the outcome is decided. Still it would be interesting to see how long he can delay the final blow. Thats the motivation for the Japanese
side in the first place when the tide turns.

[PaxMondo]

Like most everyone else, I've read both sides here, and my first conclusion is: "Wow, this game really does do a heck of a good job of simulating the realities of WWII Pac."
 
I think it also reinforces what I've long known and will REALLY have to keep in mind in my own games.  The result here is so eerily close to the actual result, and played by two experts.
 
1.  The JAP success is based upon audacity and risk management. 
2.  The Allies buildup through '42 is significant.  From July '42 beware.
 
Looking at the AAR, it's really great, and moreover, its played without the political impacts and it still ends up at a near historical result.  IRL, the US invades Guadacanal in Aug '42 more on political than military goals.  They HAVE to have some success or risk losing support at home.  As several people correctly state, DEI is strategically far more important than the Solomons.  But in Aug '42, the allies can't do DEI.  They can do Solomons (barely) and so do.  Q-Ball though is more patient, methodically assembles his forces and strikes at the DEI.  Strategically, very much on point IMHO.
 
My takeaway's from this AAR as JAP:
1. You've got to keep accurate estimates of allied strength and factor that into your planning. 
2. Isolating OZ is even more important in the game than IRL.  It poses too much risk to DEI and without the real life political interference, players will come north much sooner and more forcefully.
 
 
As Allies:
1. Methodical build up will (always) work.
2. Let JAP take the risks.  There is little/no upside for the Allies.
3. Do not allow OZ to be isolated.  Everything else is negotiable. 
 
 

[princep01]

Actually, I have to disagree. This game is "won" on points. The Japanese can win the game via an auto victory (i.e. 4-1 after 42) or by holding out to prevent the Allied victory point levels. The Japanese "win" many more than 5% of all games by those measures. The winner is NOT decide on Dec. 7. However, in my humble opinion, cuttlefish has no chance in this game of winning at all. Yes, it is possible, he can extend this one a bit longer (although I do not personnally think so for reasons cited earlier). The Allies might walk into a well designed trap and all that....but, not likely.

The simple fact is that Q-Ball will retard oil supplies within 3-4 months and cut it off almost entirely in 6-7 months. Japanese industry withers accordingly and the military end follows very quickly.

The players are free as the wind to decide whether to go forth, redo or start anew. I'd vote for the latter. However, there is little doubt in my mind for whither this game goes. The end is clearly in sight. Let us be smarter than the Emperor and sue for peace before the HI are a burned out shell and his people suffer untold horrors.

[LoBaron]

With a decent opponent auto-victory is much harder to achieve than in stock.
There are a couple of AAR´s where the strategical map is blood red down to mid-OZ and its just not enough.
If you find the first Japanes AV against an at least medium experienced Allied player please let me know, I will be an
avid reader of his AAR.

That said ill stick to my 5% rate for now. [;)]

Both, Q-ball and Cuttlefish, can still learn much by going on. End-game experience is valuable and rare.

[Chickenboy]

I agree. Soldier on. It's only fair for the Allies to get to use the uncoiled arsenal that they've had to build patiently over the last year of game time.

[Rob Brennan UK]

WOW , amazing AAR , just caught up on a reccomendation from Admiral Fujita LoBaron [;)]. and very interesting discussion. In Q-Balls place i would offer a re-do, just to keep the game more balanced (its still pretty early after all) , that said however cuttlefish most likely wouldn't take it (i havnt read his side yet) as he seems like a fair player. on a historical note yes its eerily like you know where .

I'm not critisizing Q-ball in any way and really applaud his positioning and use of all avalable assets to force a showdown at a time and place of his choosing.

Just as an obervation about the game overall, it seems to me that going for the DEI as an allied priority does doom japan to an earlier demise as losing the DEI oil will kill Japan off in a few months. I have no problem with this strategy and its one i used in WitP sucessfully (albeit i did it in reverse and went south from sabang in sumatra). I am however toying with the idea of playing allies and deliberately not trying to annialate japans economy in 42. SE-Asia is fair game as are raids from Darwin, but mainly go semi historical to keep the game going longer so both sides get to play with new toys later in the war.

Just thinking out loud here.

Great game Q-Ball and well played , i hope i have as much fun when i start GC PBEM. Still having a whale of time with the scenarios atm though.

Thank you for taking the time to post and keep us public entertained.

[Smeulders]

I'm guessing that feats like this will be harder to replicate for later allied players. This and other PBEMs are showing the vulnerability to an offensive from Darwin and I think that Japanese players will now either reinforce this area heavily or go further and capture Northern Australia as a buffer. That said, this offensive by Q-ball deserves this victory, he saw a weakness, exploited it and created the situation that led to this carrier battle.

[Q-Ball]

Great comments guys! I completely agree on the DEI; it is the soft underbelly of the Empire. If I am Japan, I would add Darwin and the North Coast of OZ to the must-take list. On the bright side, if you move early enough (i.e. Feb/mar), it shouldn't be too difficult.

As far as VPs go, I think that it is nearly impossible for the Japanese to win on VPs in AE, if the two opponents are even remotely evenly matched. It was very difficult in WITP; I played a 2x2 where we overran almost all of India, all of New Zealand, Northern Australia, most of the Aleutians, sank several CVs.....and it was going to be close on auto-victory. I will be interested to see, but I bet hardly any Japanese players will win from a VP-standpoint.

At any rate, the Allies will win this game because the Allies always do, so it's a matter of how quick or what happens along the way.

Combat Report, Jan 14, 1942


Battle of the Banda Sea: Today was the wrap-up phase; several IJN cripples were caught and sunk, including Hiei (which ate 26 bombs in addition to the pounding it took yesterday), and CAs Suzuya, Takao, and Chokai. That brings the total to at least 4 CV, 2 BB, and 4 CA, and Fuso, if not sunk, was certainly handled rudely.

We lost HMS Hermes, Cophaee, CA Hawkins, and 2 DD. I will be without the services of most of the RN BBs for awhile; Valiant and Warspite have been recalled to London, and only Revenge and Repulse remain operational, with all other BBs reparing some level of damage. This will put a dent into my surface forces in the DEI, though I am transferring at least 4 USN BBs into the area to compensate; probably 2 Idahos and 2 Fast BBs.

Plans: I expect it to be quiet for a few turns, until I get the Luganville and Kendari invasions loaded and on the way. These are the next targets. The IJN still has plenty of strength to interfere, but at this point we can afford some losses.