Caging the Tiger~ Rader (J) vs. GreyJoy (A)

[rader]

I trained LowN...

Hmm, signature not working...

[JohnDillworth]

But how would they break though the 6 or so Iowa class BBs guarding his invasions and shore bombarding me every turn?

Well he only gets 4 Iowa's I don't have the game open but I don't know if all of those are on line yet. Count up his modern fast BB's. Can't speak to his deployments but those BB's have multiple responsibility. I think your night fighting is better than his radar. As long as he has no PT's about I think it is a 50/50 shot. Of course your guys might not come back so it's only worth it if you hit something juicy, then it's a knife fight. What else are you going to do do with them? my 2 cents

[rader]

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

But how would they break though the 6 or so Iowa class BBs guarding his invasions and shore bombarding me every turn?

Well he only gets 4 Iowa's I don't have the game open but I don't know if all of those are on line yet. Count up his modern fast BB's. Can't speak to his deployments but those BB's have multiple responsibility. I think your night fighting is better than his radar. As long as he has no PT's about I think it is a 50/50 shot. Of course your guys might not come back so it's only worth it if you hit something juicy, then it's a knife fight. What else are you going to do do with them? my 2 cents

But if I try to interfere, I will get sunk by his a/c anyway before I get there. Sure I will use them if he tries to invade somewhere outside his air umbrela of course. You're right. They aren't much use after the surrender documents have been signed...

Anyone know how t link a photo for a signature?

EDITL: Uh oh, too big... will have to shrink it...

[rader]

testing...

[rader]

testing... EDIT: I shrank it a lot, but it's still coming out huge [:@]

EIDT: Not great resolution, but it'll do for now.

[bigred]

Hi Radar.  what with the Space colony photo[8D], you and your classmates going to the moon?

[rader]

ORIGINAL: bigred

Hi Radar.  what with the Space colony photo[8D], you and your classmates going to the moon?

Hopefully we all are... Mars is better but Earth dosen't look so impressive from there [;)]

[rader]

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

But how would they break though the 6 or so Iowa class BBs guarding his invasions and shore bombarding me every turn?

Well he only gets 4 Iowa's I don't have the game open but I don't know if all of those are on line yet. Count up his modern fast BB's. Can't speak to his deployments but those BB's have multiple responsibility. I think your night fighting is better than his radar. As long as he has no PT's about I think it is a 50/50 shot. Of course your guys might not come back so it's only worth it if you hit something juicy, then it's a knife fight. What else are you going to do do with them? my 2 cents

I basically mean any US BB with 16" guns... iowa class, SoDak, Wash, Mass, etc.

Go Massachusetts [:D] Only BB I've been on.

EDIT: Unless you count Mikasa, but that's a cruiser sized pre-dreadnought...

[rader]

Quiet turns these days. I think we're both licking our wounds after that last major series of air battles.

I'm not sure what GJ is up to... he has his invasion fleet in Hakkodate under 3,200 fighters. His bombers are all there too.

All is quiet as out ~6000 AV each in Hachinohe and Akita (the two clear hexes in northern Honshu) make faces at each other. He keeps bombarding. I wonder if he's going to send more troops, continue attacking, or what?

He's bombarding them with all his BBs and CAs every turn, inflicting mild attrition. I get the sense that something isn't quite historical about being able to bombard every second day but I can't put my finger on it. Maybe it is reasonable given the proximity of his port. Did the allies historically use their BBs to bombard each day or two, or did they only do it sparingly? And if they didn't do it every possible opportunity, why not? Chance of wearing out the gun barrels? I'm just curious, not complaining, but I am wondering what the historical drawback to using a ship to shell a coast day after day was (if any?). You only really hear about shore bombardment accompanying invasions.

He has 71 land units (250,000 troops) in Hakkodate along with his fleet. I am watching these guys closely. If he wants to invade somewhere down the coast, we'll at least have some warning when he loads up the troops.

I've given up trying to contest the air in northern Honshu. I just can't compete with 3200 fighters near his base. If I send in strikes, they come in dribs and drabs and get chewed up before they can do anything. I've got to save my naval air force and remaining navy in case he wants to come down the coast. If he keeps sending troops up north, it is going to be up to the army to stop them. But any landing south of those 4 bases in the north (or a move towards the Bonins/Ryukus/other) will be fiercely contested with KB, LBA, and remaining surface forces.

I have a feeling that I'll be able to hold out for about another year until around September 1945 when the ETO forces arrive. After that there won't be much that can stop the Allied jugernaut. And with the ahistorically fast pace of operations possible in AE, it might not last long past that point. I'm hoping to hold out at least until xmas 1945... in fact, that's my goal for both games (see Taming the Bear).

[JohnDillworth]

Unless you count Mikasa, but that's a cruiser sized pre-dreadnought

Been on the Mass also. I've had the pleasure of seeing the New Jersey at sea, well at river. Operation Sail, sometime in the early 80's I think she went up the Hudson. I was surprised how low to the water she looked. Very business like. Most of the other ships were newer. A BB is a BB and nothing looks like a big gun ship.
Do you still have the Musahsi, Nagato & Mutsu? Those have equal guns

[rader]

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

Unless you count Mikasa, but that's a cruiser sized pre-dreadnought

Been on the Mass also. I've had the pleasure of seeing the New Jersey at sea, well at river. Operation Sail, sometime in the early 80's I think she went up the Hudson. I was surprised how low to the water she looked. Very business like. Most of the other ships were newer. A BB is a BB and nothing looks like a big gun ship.
Do you still have the Musahsi, Nagato & Mutsu? Those have equal guns

I have Mustsu and Musashi... Nagato was sunk by a PT boat... just like Yamato, and 2 of the Kirishimas [8|]

[pat.casey]

ORIGINAL: rader

He's bombarding them with all his BBs and CAs every turn, inflicting mild attrition. I get the sense that something isn't quite historical about being able to bombard every second day but I can't put my finger on it. Maybe it is reasonable given the proximity of his port. Did the allies historically use their BBs to bombard each day or two, or did they only do it sparingly? And if they didn't do it every possible opportunity, why not? Chance of wearing out the gun barrels? I'm just curious, not complaining, but I am wondering what the historical drawback to using a ship to shell a coast day after day was (if any?). You only really hear about shore bombardment accompanying invasions.

They kept the battleships offshore on normany for a few days after the invasion proper and ended up withdrawing them for fear of submarines rather than b/c they were out of ammo or anything analagous.

Likewise in WW I they didn't use battleships for shore bombardment much since it put them out of position in the event the high seas fleet sortied, but the british at least did have a large number of inshore monitors with battleship guns that they used as continuous fire support platforms for operations along the channel coast.

Same deal in Korea, when they had targets the navy stayed on station. They put a BB task force off the coast to support the retreat at Chosin and put something like 20,000 shells on-shore over the coarse of a week.

Don't actually know how common "long term" bombardments were in the pacific theatre, perhaps somebody else has some good examples.

[Xxzard]

As pat.casey mentioned, the fear of losing such valuable assets tended to cripple their use in such operations. Like Japan keeping Yamato sitting around at Truk b/c it was too valuable to risk doing what it was built for. GJ on the other hand probably figures bombarding is all they are useful for at this point.

I think you are probably right that the large caliber gun barrels would wear out fairly quickly. Replacement tubes existed, but the logistics of transporting and installing them in occupied territory would be painful.

Beyond that though, with the exception of Chosin, the army usually managed to advance outside the range of support fire before it was really an issue for the Navy. This line of thought leads to an oft cited issue with the game. IMO, massive land combat situations are not the strongest point of this game. It has been said before, but I'll say it again, the game does not simulate continuous combat. To my mind it is more like WW1, either you make gains with an overwhelming (2-1) attack, or you take massive casualties with almost anything less. I mean surely after weeks of fighting and with the support of tank divisions and tens of thousands of men, the allied army could at least push its way off the beach. But it is simulated as if they are still fighting for the beach. (i.e. transports dropping off supply taking CD fire, etc) Not to take anything away from your effort here, I just struggle to believe the Japanese could pull off an "Anzio style" containment of such a large landing in this situation.

Anyways, that's my 2cents, and isn't even entirely on topic... oh well.

[rader]

ORIGINAL: Xxzard

As pat.casey mentioned, the fear of losing such valuable assets tended to cripple their use in such operations. Like Japan keeping Yamato sitting around at Truk b/c it was too valuable to risk doing what it was built for. GJ on the other hand probably figures bombarding is all they are useful for at this point.

I think you are probably right that the large caliber gun barrels would wear out fairly quickly. Replacement tubes existed, but the logistics of transporting and installing them in occupied territory would be painful.

Beyond that though, with the exception of Chosin, the army usually managed to advance outside the range of support fire before it was really an issue for the Navy. This line of thought leads to an oft cited issue with the game. IMO, massive land combat situations are not the strongest point of this game. It has been said before, but I'll say it again, the game does not simulate continuous combat. To my mind it is more like WW1, either you make gains with an overwhelming (2-1) attack, or you take massive casualties with almost anything less. I mean surely after weeks of fighting and with the support of tank divisions and tens of thousands of men, the allied army could at least push its way off the beach. But it is simulated as if they are still fighting for the beach. (i.e. transports dropping off supply taking CD fire, etc) Not to take anything away from your effort here, I just struggle to believe the Japanese could pull off an "Anzio style" containment of such a large landing in this situation.

Anyways, that's my 2cents, and isn't even entirely on topic... oh well.

Anzio style containment, maybe not, but a chance at pushing the allies back into the sea... maybe [;)]

At least in the book Downfall, the author makes the case that it would certainly not have been easy to invade the home islands, even in late 1945 or early 1946. Japan would have had massive local superiority in the target sector, with many more forces than the germans had in the Normandy area. From the author's description, an invasion of the home islands would have been much more difficult than Normandy, Anzio, Salerno, Sicily, or any of the major invasions in the ETO.... more difficult terrain, and stronger resistance. I would go so far as to say that, with the allied committment to a Germany first and the historical forces, the allies should probably not be able to defeat the Japanese army in a massive battle in 1944. 1945 with the European redeployments, maybe. And piecemeal on island garrisons, of course. But put all the allied land forces in the PTO vs. all the Japanese land forces in 1944, and the Japanese should win every time.

But I absolutely agree with your main point about incremental combat benefits. The combat is modelled exactly the opposite of how it is advertised: it is all or nothing.

I came up with a system that would work really well where hex control would gradually shift from one side to the other with progressive attack (and shift back with counterattacks). E.g., the % of the hex control changed from the enemy side to your side in an attack would be equal to double the odds achieved. Get a 1:2, you get 1% of the hex. Get a 10:1, you get 20% of the hex. You capture the base at 51%. Once you get the full hex, the enemy has to retreat. Ideally, it should have hysteresis, so that it stats at 10%/90% or something.

[rader]

ORIGINAL: Xxzard

I think you are probably right that the large caliber gun barrels would wear out fairly quickly. Replacement tubes existed, but the logistics of transporting and installing them in occupied territory would be painful.

I wonder if they should accumulate system damage from bombardment... maybe they do? (never checked)

[rader]

We're now in late September 1944 (I think around the 28th). Not much going on. He seems to be just sitting there waiting, while he continues to daily bombard Japanese positions at Hachinohe.

No sign of the allied CVs, although a CVE did accidentally drift into range of Japanese dive bombers and get sunk yesterday (at the cost of ~50 Judys to CAP).

He's got another invasion forces (not yet loaded) of ~70 units at Hakkodate apparently waiting for a signal to proceed. I suspect what's happening is that he's decided to change plans after the landings in the North, and is now resolved to land farther down the coast in an outflanking move. But he wasn't planning to do that before, or is planning to go somewhere different, so he is waiting to reprep his units for the new target.

I can't allow my full attention to get sucked into the norht - I've got to remain alert to the possibility of invasion anywhere along the coast of Honshu. He could even go straight for the north coast of Kyushu... An interesting place for him to try would be Shimonoseki, right at the junction of Kyushu-Honshu. At least there is a big fortress there.

I've tried to put at least a division with some forts in each of the vulnerable invasion hexes closer to Hokkaido, with closer ones getting more like 3+ divisions. At the same time, I'm keeping at least some units in strat mode so they can rail in to respond to an invasion of any of the beaches. Units in strat mode don't do that well, but behind heavy forts they seem to at least contribute a good fraction of their unmodified AC and add bulk to defenders that are already entrenched. Their presence can be critical in the few days immediately following an invasion.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: rader

At least in the book Downfall, the author makes the case that it would certainly not have been easy to invade the home islands, even in late 1945 or early 1946. Japan would have had massive local superiority in the target sector, with many more forces than the germans had in the Normandy area. From the author's description, an invasion of the home islands would have been much more difficult than Normandy, Anzio, Salerno, Sicily, or any of the major invasions in the ETO.... more difficult terrain, and stronger resistance. I would go so far as to say that, with the allied committment to a Germany first and the historical forces, the allies should probably not be able to defeat the Japanese army in a massive battle in 1944. 1945 with the European redeployments, maybe. And piecemeal on island garrisons, of course. But put all the allied land forces in the PTO vs. all the Japanese land forces in 1944, and the Japanese should win every time.

Great point, rader. I never really thought of this in this way, but it's a logical position.

In some ways, it's a great opportunity for you. Just think about how public support would flag for hundreds of thousands of American boys 'trapped' on a bridgehead in Japan, facing WWI-style combat and casualties. A grinding infantry-focused war of attrition was not what the American command had in mind and was not playing to their PR strengths.

Maybe they'd sue for peace if they couldn't break out?

You've got him by the nose, now, as George Patton would say, "kick him in the ***".

[rader]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Great point, rader. I never really thought of this in this way, but it's a logical position.

In some ways, it's a great opportunity for you. Just think about how public support would flag for hundreds of thousands of American boys 'trapped' on a bridgehead in Japan, facing WWI-style combat and casualties. A grinding infantry-focused war of attrition was not what the American command had in mind and was not playing to their PR strengths.

Maybe they'd sue for peace if they couldn't break out?

You've got him by the nose, now, as George Patton would say, "kick him in the ***".

Remember that the Japanese army was basically the same size as the German army, and the Japanese historically dramatically drew down their strength in China and Manchuria to reinforce the home islands (as I have done). Japan has 6 million under arms in 1945 (5 million active in the army). This is about the same size as the peak strength of the Whermacht, and indeed Japan had a slighly larger population than Germany (~75 million million vs. ~68 million). (Today, Japan has a much larger population at arouind 120 million vs. ~80 million as I recall...)

The reason the Soviets had such an easy time in August 1945 was that the Kwangtung army had been stripped of all its best divisions for defense of the Marianas, Philipinnes, Okinawa, and especially the home islands. By 1945, most of the strength of the Japanese army, which was virtually untouched by the war up to that point (and was in no sense defeated in WW2), was fortified in the home islands (> 3 million soldiers in Japan alone). I'm not sure about how many US troops were available for operations in the PTO before operations ended in the ETO, but I would be willing to bet that it was a lot less than 3 million! Imagine what would have happened at Normandy if most of the German army had been facing the allies instead of it being mostly in Russia facing the Soviets.

And the Japanese were starting to learn how to inflict maximum casualties on the Americans by 1945. The casualty exchange rate was skyrocketing. It went from something like 10 Japanese casualties to each american in the early battles (e.g., Guadalcanal, New Guinea) to 3:1 (Japanese:American) in the Marianas, Palau, and Leyte, to 2:1 at Okinawa ~ and this was despite an American numerical superiority of around 6:1 and a firepower superiority of closer to 10:1. (At Iwo Jima, the casualty ratio was around a scary 1:1.) With numerical superiority, support of a local fanatical population, and no need to reinforce & resupply by sea, the casualty ratio could have been worse in Japan proper. Would the US public accept 1.5 million casualties when there was a chance that blockade & bombing alone might win eventually?

Later on in occupied zone, the author was arguing pursuasively that it would have been a lot like vietnam, with ambushes out of the rice fields, lots of guerilla tactics, civilians strapped with explosives, etc (probably allied occupation forces should require lots of garrison in Japan to prevent partisan attacks?). The world is extremely fortunate it never came to an invasion of Japan - I'm sure if it had, relations between Japan and the west would not be nearly so rosy today.

All this being said, I think I've got basically no chance to kick him out. His firepower would cut down my attackers before I got the assault off, and even if I got high odds, that is no guarantee of getting him to surrender if he is in the open instead of being in one of his own bases [8|]

I might be able to mount an effective and protracted defense... but attacking is probably out of the question given his superior firepower.

[Crackaces]

As far as the Soviets .. an operational detail that existed since Khalkhin Gol is far superior armor. In the open terrain the Guards Armies are murder against way undersized/inferior IJ armor.

The difference between any war previously fought by the United States and the "struggle with Japan" is that the Japanese struck first without a declaration of war. Despite the best rationalizations of the JFB's no way would the US sue for peace with anything less than unconditional surrender. Given the hypothetical situation that the IJ have been able to out produce the US in air power and some hypothetical situation that the US industrial might is somehow being completely diverted away from the Pacific [the historical withdrawals were made because the IJ blew it at Midway ..[;)] ] Ok the decision at this point would be around destroying Japan as a nation. Oppenheimer is very very busy these days .. [;)]

[rader]

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

As far as the Soviets .. an operational detail that existed since Khalkhin Gol is far superior armor. In the open terrain the Guards Armies are murder against way undersized/inferior IJ armor.

The difference between any war previously fought by the United States and the "struggle with Japan" is that the Japanese struck first without a declaration of war. Despite the best rationalizations of the JFB's no way would the US sue for peace with anything less than unconditional surrender. Given the hypothetical situation that the IJ have been able to out produce the US in air power and some hypothetical situation that the US industrial might is somehow being completely diverted away from the Pacific [the historical withdrawals were made because the IJ blew it at Midway ..[;)] ] Ok the decision at this point would be around destroying Japan as a nation. Oppenheimer is very very busy these days .. [;)]

Absolutely, the Kwangtung army would have been defeated anyway being spread out in the open and attacked on 3 sides, but probably not as rapidly, and if they had pre-emptively withdrawn to Korea (maybe politically unlikely), they would have performed much better.

I also agree that the US would probably have pursued the war until the end. The possibility of any kind of negotiated settlement short of unconditional surrender was pure Japanese fantasy. But it is possible that the the blockade and bomb camp would have prevailed, leading to a war that laster until 1947 or so before Japan finally got tired of fighting and the right people in the Japanese camp took power and surrendered.