New game of WAW U2 ( Bono V.) version

[explorer2]

cveta-
From the descriptions I've been reading, your "luck" does seem to be pretty bad consistently, which is puzzling. We all get horrible results occassionally due to randomness.
Here's my 2 cents as to possible reasons:

XP: I have found that sending units in with less than 30 XP usually is a disaster, no matter what the other odds. Remember, the formula for how AT conducts combat is exceedingly complex, each factor weighted differently, and the weights affected by other factors. XP seems to be a pretty important one, and from my experience, 30 XP is a kind of threshold

Defense vs. Offense: As a general rule of thumb, when any 2 units that are identical in all ways engage in combat, AT rules seem to give about 80-90% win to defender. Now of course, it is rare to have 2 identical units in combat, but because of this, I don't feel ANY confidence in an attack unless I'm pretty close to "2:1" odds. With different sft type mixes, this all is quite complex, 82ndtrooper gave really good info on how the mixes affect naval battles.

Readiness: as 82nd already pointed out, you lose readiness with movement, so oftentimes with naval combat, you may have incredibly good odds, but if your readiness is down to 20 or 30 you don't have much "punch" left.

Don't know if any of this helps, you probably know all this already anyway, but just my best shot at an explanation.

[kondor]

My 2 cents about naval combat: You can get to carriers only when you have destroyed or routed the CAG-s. It is simple as that.
How will you go about it is your decision.

Let's say last fight CV Essex had vs yours two weaken CV I. My boys started droping bombs on your CV-s only when your CAG-s where out of the equasion (destroyed or whitdrawn), only then for few turns green bars besides your ships went down until their destruction...

It is similar to subs vs CV-s. I know (from experiance) that I will not attack CV-II (7 CAG-s onboard) except I have enough subs to break through...
And what is enough number of subs?
My solution is this-count the number of CAG-s+1 and you have enough subs to maybe do some damage...below that do not even attack...

CAG-s+1= Minimum number of subs to attack

Ofcourse if CV-s are guarded by DD-s then the equasion is not so simple any more and number changes...

It is the same to CV-s on CV-s. When enemy CAG-s are down soon the CV-s will follow... I don't have enough experiance there to know excatly what number is needed... (But as WA my goal is not only to destroy your CV-s it is to wear you down... You cannot replace losses as much as I can so every plane is more valuable to you... But I am off point again.)
We know by numbers that CAG-s (not like FT-s) have more value in attacking then defending (slightly). And we know that CA goes through planes as knife through butter... So it is very hard to bring down CV group with strong cruiser support from air...

Altough I was surprised on your first strike- how powerfull your fleet was (around 50 CAG-s on mine 35 + few FT-s III + few CA III and few CA I. Keep in mind that I have not lost a single CV from Pacific, and whole Atlantic fleet has been joined into PAC fleet... and still the IJN was vastly supperior. I expected to lose that one). Later I was not worried because it is doubtfall that you can remove my air cover and then deal with ships... (if I didn't have strong CA support I would be worried... and sad by destruction of my fleet [;)]).

I will not mention randomness and luck much... Cveta had his share of bad luck and I had mine... How many times his garrisons holded only with one or two man? How many cities I lost in that way... It is normal in this game as is in life.

[cveta]

I belive that problem with my last attack with subs was low exp. And screenshot shows a position before I attack. Some of thouse carier alredy use all their AP.
And I know about movments of the ship and carrier air. That is a reason why I like carrier air III. Enemy maybe attacket from much grater distance.

And something else - I ( or kondor ) post few post before ( page 7 ) a results of air attack of China flying tigers - 10 FT II + 4LB I attacked inf.units with 3 flaks and 12 carier air in interception. Loses were 1 FT for attacker and 5 carrier air + 1 flak+ some inf for defender. Is this normal behavier of carrier air? Andt house are full of exp, over 60.
I know that carier air are weaker than normal FT, but if I understand things corectly plains are stronger in interception than in attack. So few comets will be welcomed. I was realy certan that 12 carrier air will provide good air cover an that this inf.units will be safe from air attack.

[kondor]

Carrier air or CAG-s are different then FT-s. They are WEAKER in defence then in offensive. (At least CAG-s II are). That was a more or less normal result of the raid IMO.
FT-s are full of exp. to, they are stronger then CAG-s and flaks are almost uselless...
+ LB-s are good in bombing infantry to...

[kondor]

ORIGINAL: 82ndtrooper

also when attacking with subs split them into multiple groups and attack from 2 or 3 sides so you can get the attack bonus. the attack bonus makes a big difference in naval combat

I think this is not correct. There is no attack bonus from mutliple directions at sea as there is on ground attacks. So attacking from multiple directions is of no importance (maybe only when you are attacking from all sides and make enemy fleet run=surrender because there is nowhere to run).

Pls correct me if I am wrong here.

ORIGINAL: Cveta

10 carier air II and 2 Cruiser II were attacked by 18-20 carier air III. I lose

IRC my FT-s III from Enewetak (see picture) did participate and help me out in that air battle. I don't recall was 4 or 2 of them in that time on intercept.

ORIGINAL: Cveta
quote:

ORIGINAL: kondor

Wow that seems lika a bad luck. To bad for you... But it does make game more interesting .



Realy - I didnot notice that

Well yes, it will help me a bit, but not enough to stop you of winning as Japan...
If I am correct, I have only 2 or 3 turns left and you have about 10 VP-s more then you need to win. So ultimately I failed there... But am not giving up yet!

[GrumpyMel]

Some observations:

1) There is no flanking attack bonus in naval combat, that only applies to land combat (unless I'm mistaken), so attacking from multiple sides does nothing for you unless you can completely cut off the enemy fleets line of retreat. If you can surround the enemy fleet or pin him up against land and win the combat, a retreat result will cause the loss of his entire fleet.

I just tried this against you in our game 82ndTrooper, unfortunately most of the Regia Marina were too busy watching Betty Grable movies to bother manning thier guns.... and it pretty much ended in disaster for me. I probably need to start importing some Japanese sailors, at least they seem to know how to shoot straight. However, had I been lucky enough to force you to retreat, you would have lost the entire task force.

2) Land based fighters absolutely eat CAG's for breakfast. Take a look at the numbers on the SFT sheets. You need something like 2-1 or 3-1 odds with CAG's to make it an EVEN fight against Fighters. CAG's are for killing ships and other CAG's...never rely on them for air superiority unless you have a massive numbers advantage.

3) Flak IS quite usefull in Air Defense, particularly if it's not the target of the attack itself (i.e. firing from an adjacent hex). An integrated air defense is the way to go... a few Flak guns supporting your CAP and you can do a number on enemy air attacks...even against superior odds.

The results you had in that air combat weren't all that unusual, you probably should have scored 1 or maybe 2 more kills but not more then that. If those had been fighters rather then CAG you would have anhilated that attack.

The trick with Flak is to try to spread it out (and keep it in good cover). Flak is vulnerable to air attack itself...so if it's the target of the attack, it's potentcy is reduced as it takes readiness loss from the air attack... you want your Flak in the hex NEXT to the target... so it gets free shots each combat round...and doesn't take any return fire.

I'm pretty bad at the naval game....so can't give you much more advice there.

[82ndtrooper]

I want to apologize to Kondor if I interfered in your game. I wasn't trying to help cveta win, I was just trying to figure out why he was consistently having such bad results, and I only tried to give information that might be helpful to both of you.

I am aware that there is supposed to be no combat bonus in naval combat and I didn't explain myself properly.  For me "with subs" I have found that I do much better with them if I split them into smaller groups and attack from multiple sides. I do not know the exact reason why, but maybe its simalar to the mechanic of flak during the combat round where one group of subs gets the main defense attack and the others don't get hit as much. Also after the attack I find that more of my subs survive any counter attacks because they are in multiple different hex's causing the enemy to have to attack  different hex's to kill all my subs rather than just one. Either way for me its very important to attack with subs like that. its one of my tricks. [:)]

Its very hard to figure out problems from just reading a AAR and viewing screen shots. But if I understand cveta correctly then that screen shot showed the position of his carriers when he launched his air attack. If so then that's one of the things he is doing wrong. he launched his attack from extreme range.

Every hex that a plane has to fly before it reaches its target uses up AP, so just like in real life its low on "fuel" and can only do a few combat rounds before it has to return to its base. This greatly reduces the chances of it scoring any hits and killing/sinking an enemy unit. To maximize your Carrier air attacks you want to get the carrier as close to the target as you can before launching your air strike, then move it to safety after the air strike.

Good luck to both of you and I will not offer any more advice in this thread. If either of you want to ask me any questions feel free to PM me and I will gladly answer them to the best of my ability.

/salute

[cveta]

Well I understnd everithing you write, people here, and I tray lots of thouse "ideas" including small sub units and surounding the target ( look at the discusion in game where I am axis and JurgenKraut is allied ) -whole game I was duing exactly this with great sucess. But something is wrong with my luck.
Look at the next screenshot . Kondor is attack my main JA feet with only carrier air II. He were lower in numbers of planes and I have whole fleet to suport me ( other way attack were alredy discussed - I was attacker and all three attacks I have greter cassulties than defender ). In this attack kondor and I have equall losses.
Also - my ships are high of exp, my carrier air II are thouse that participate in attack on Pear lHarbour 1st turn. Sowe cannot talk about lowexp units. And carier air exp is aproximatly 50. Reddiness is 100%.
So still I canot found the reason that 3 my attack failed ( 2:1 cassulty rate ) and his one goes better than mine. [:@]
Luckly I know him and I will discuss his luck over beer in Sunday. If this continue I will over drink him in a rate of 2:1 and will put everithing on his account[:)]

[cveta]

Back to game.
Germany forces continue to smush the USA soldiers hat arrives in France. Few more med.tanks and armord cars + inf distroyed. All attacking foces successfully str.transfer to safe zone.
SU forces that atack from TULA direction- well kondor describe this as a mistake, but he put exelent fighter trap there so I didnot attack anything. Germany withrow.

[cveta]

Pressure on Leningrad was putted again. I hope that this time we will have better luck.
In Mediterenean see noting new. Afica is inactiv atm, West carrier still cruise.
JA - well if kondor dont do some miracle there JA will win. I avoid major battles this turn. Insted I sink group of DD with troops on board. My primary targets for now are land units in transport since carrier ari still dont bring the VP[:D]
In Asia - small fights with China.
I tray to atatck Bangok wich failed to para assult last turn,but parras hold a line.

[kondor]

This turn Iwo Jima and Port Swettenham (production centar northwest from Singapure) changed owner and are back under USA protection [;)]. And still I am 10 PP behind and Jap is only turn or two from victory.

This turn I felt so cheap[:o]. Did a gamey thing... Enemy subs ignored, enemy DD-s ignored, 2 enemy CV-s II with only 3-4 Cag-s ignored... And what did I hit with my CAG-s? 3-4 riffles and a goat...[:(].
I had to ignore everyting and go for few VP-s. Sooo cheap I tell you![:(][:)]

Victory conditions IMO need changing. No way in hell that I would play such a turn in some simulation (will not even talk about RL).
Cveta will most probably win as Japan and I am not contesting that, but a proposition to make this fine game more interesting.
IMO vic. cond. for Japan should be: survive untill some date and you win. If your empire was larger then you survive untill that turn- 2 turns and you win . Something like that.

Back to game.
My main Paf. fleet under admiral Halsey sailed back towards Australia as I am 10 VP short I need Sidney. Simple as that.
Gained 2 more CV-III this turn, but to late for anything smart to do with them. They will surve as a luxury cruise ships .

In France main GE 462nd IWillWickYouInTheAss corps felt a wrath of WA airforce. Cveta be still: heavy tenk survived the mayham[:)].

We are only few hexes from Paris now.

Denmark also visited by WA troops...

[explorer2]

You guys get to choose how you do this, but as 82nd I think brought to my attention, when I changed the victory conditions for JA to 24 instead of 18 turns with 110VP, I did not change the Scoring Screen to reflect that. A better indication of JA's expertise in playing the game would be 24 turns I believe.

Based on other games played, I think 18 turns does not allow USA enough time.

Also, to have a set date to "survive"
a) doesn't work because the date JA begins the war changes based on a number of variables
b) wouldn't give enough incentives for JA to be very offense minded - they just set up huge amount of defense in homeland or something from the beginning and wait.
The VP are designed based on JA's own documents about establishing and then defending their Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.

24 turns with 110 VP may not be ideal as far as the game goes, and sure towards the end can create "gamey" tactics, but isn't that what happens at the end of any game? (compared to real life).

Just my 2 cents. You guys can always choose your own house rules for victory conditions.

[82ndtrooper]

you can set any victory conditions that you want too.  The game dosnt stop, you can keep on playing. The game also continues to keep score so you can keep track. Its very flexible and Its completely up to you. 

[kondor]

ORIGINAL: 82ndtrooper

you can set any victory conditions that you want too.  The game dosnt stop, you can keep on playing. The game also continues to keep score so you can keep track. Its very flexible and Its completely up to you. 

But ofcourse we will play it to the end. There is no reason why WA, SU, China, GE cannot win to ;-D.

[kondor]

ORIGINAL: explorer2

You guys get to choose how you do this, but as 82nd I think brought to my attention, when I changed the victory conditions for JA to 24 instead of 18 turns with 110VP, I did not change the Scoring Screen to reflect that. A better indication of JA's expertise in playing the game would be 24 turns I believe.

Based on other games played, I think 18 turns does not allow USA enough time.

Also, to have a set date to "survive"
a) doesn't work because the date JA begins the war changes based on a number of variables
b) wouldn't give enough incentives for JA to be very offense minded - they just set up huge amount of defense in homeland or something from the beginning and wait.
The VP are designed based on JA's own documents about establishing and then defending their Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.

24 turns with 110 VP may not be ideal as far as the game goes, and sure towards the end can create "gamey" tactics, but isn't that what happens at the end of any game? (compared to real life).

Just my 2 cents. You guys can always choose your own house rules for victory conditions.

Point taken.
I agree that there are many variables about when JA enters the war... Didn't think about that.
And about Japan building a strong homeland defense... well that could be avoided by setting high watermark for Japan. But it is a mute argument now...

I agree that your solution is better, and 18 turns are to easy for JA... Just don't feeling comftarable playing in seach a manner (avoding fleets just to get to ground attack...)
But it needs to be done if it is a close match (and between Cveta and me always is![;)])=

[82ndtrooper]

I think explorer was also trying to say that in this version its already set for japan to need 24 turns. even though the game still says 18. you will know when the victory conditions are met because you will get a text message at the beginning of the turn, but that's all, you can continue to play if you choose.

[cveta]

Lol - dont kill my last hope for fast wictory - I play pretty agresivly from start to score as much as passible VC and last 5-10 turns didnot even think on advance towar Peral or inner China.
So I agree that JA have easy job ( maybe not to easy, remember that Australia and N.Zeland fell on 1st turn) but we start the game under this conditions.

[kondor]

I agree, if you keep 110 for turn or two (don't remember) Japs win. In this scenario, when we will play U3 it will be 24 turns.

[kondor]

Last turn for me to deny Japs vic. conditions... and the report on the beginning of the turn said Japs have 119 of 110 points needed to win [X(].

Cveta in last turn searched all around to find my LR LC-s (I had no time to escort them properly). And with few DD-s he found and sunk a full one near Auckland (on route to Sydney)... But there where more scattered around [;)].

First a full attack on Sydney with my main Pac. fleet was orderes. After a series of bombing ground troops finished a job and captured a city...

I still had a chance! Two more points needed...

With group of two alone landing crafts I tried disembarking at Lae... heavily guarded by IJA my marines where killed wile landing. Still had a few AP-s so I tried at Rabaul-result was the same...[:(].

I remembered from past that Kwaejelin was guarded by dozen of riffles and a coastal fortress and I have avoided hitting that strongohold... Last chance all or nothing!

Sent all remaining CAG-s from Essex (6 I believe) with 3 FT-s III to bombard it... Ft-s where eliminated at round one (coastal fortreses[8|]) but cags survived and lowered it's readiness.
Then I remembered that two new CV-s III where on route from Pearl (didn't have full compliment of CAG-s either, 11 of them onboard). They got to the fight on time and lowered defending soldiers more readiness...
LR LC came in. First wave-almoust but my troops got killed...[:@] Second unit onboard manage to capture it! IJA killed or surendered![:D].

That puts Japs at 109 and below 110 needed. Later I took Medira? (town near Singapoure, and additional 1 VP is mine).

So Cveta now needs to capture 2 VP-s for one turn to win as Japan. Will he make it?

[kondor]

I tried to reinforced my garrison at Iwo Jima, because that one could bring him victory and it is closest to Japan... Does he have the strenght? I hope not! ;-D

Japan at 108 VP