The Power of Inexperience / GreyJoy(A)-Rader(J)

[Grfin Zeppelin]

I was off for work, came back, peeked into the thread and read something about Kamikaze carriers......made my day.

Good yer stepped back from that one or I would have posted this

[GreyJoy]

ORIGINAL: MateDow

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

Ok guys, you have made up my mind. Kamikaze allied CVTFs isn't the way to go

That is good news.

However i may argue that the CVs, given the present strategical situation, aren't exactly my best asset. If i hadn't thrown them away stupidly, they would serve as a "fleet in being"...but considering that my goal, right or wrong that it'd be, is to breack his ground defences in Honshu, their operational use would be very limited nonetheless.

As you pointed out, this is a battle of logistics. How do you supply your armies in the HI? One of the tools that you need to do this is your carrier fleet. If they aren't present, or don't exist, your task will be that much more difficult. On of the things that I have learned from reading though this is that Raeder will find a way to use his carriers against your LOC regardless of the presence of LBA. The threat of your carriers against his is staying some of his aggression (IMO).

Right now, your carriers are a fleet-in-being. Their sheer existence is controlling the course of his reactions. As others have pointed out, this is a temporary condition. Don't forget the lessons that you learned earlier in the war about the value of a limited number of carriers against a more capable force. Those people that were telling you to hoard your carriers and use them to keep Raeder honest are giving you similar advice now.

BTW, the time taken to read this from the beginning was definitely worth the time. Multiple times have I wanted to chime in with a comment as I was reading only to realize that it would pop up at the end of the discussion and make no sense whatsoever. Finally, I can comment where it might help, and where it will be understood.

MateDow, thanks for popping up and finding the time to drop your suggestions. They are most welcome, wise and logical. And i thank you for being here! feel free to keep on giving suggestions, thoughts...or just to pop up and slap my face when i do stupid things[:)]

thanks for joining

[GreyJoy]

Guys, it seems everyone here dislikes my idea of an allied kamikaze CVTF...
 
Let's put a part, for a moment, the present strategical situation.
 
Let's forget for a moment that i will need those CVs to guard my LOC and that they can be usefull in the future for the upcoming operations.
 
Let's talk just in theory...
 
Say that the allies are facing an enemy who has a good advantage in terms of CVs...let's say 2-1.
Say that the advantage isn't only numerical. Japanese carrier fighters are superior to ours (like zero against wildcats) and japanese dive bombers and torpedo bombers carry better ordinances and fly much further than the allied counterparts.
Say also that the allies already have a "bridge" of solid conquered islands from WC to Japan.
Say also that we have a game system that handles in the way we know air battles with more than 1000 planes involved.
Under these theorical circumstances a "normal" CV-CV battle how will it end statistically?
 
...my point? a part from the "fleet in being" (which is a value "per se" i do not dismiss), an ordinary battle will see me on the loser side of the hill. And, having probably half the number of fighters Rader can fill in his CVs, i'd risk to see all my platforms sunk with only minor damage inflicted (say his CAP outnumbers my escort 4-1)...a couple of torpedo hits...some bombs...by some japanese carriers will survive for sure...while we have just seen what 3/400 skilled bombers can do to our so called Death Star...
So, to me, the only hope i have is, if i have to face the enemy CVs, to deliver the most powerfull and devastating blow...and to do that i need my bombers to arrive on his ships like his graces arrived over mines last week...UNTOUCHED.
 
I'm not saying i will do it...don't worry...we're just talking...
 
In a situtuation where Rader remains with 2/3 CVs against 0 (for the moment) allied CVs, i'd say that my LOC will be secured forever (i get CVEs and CVs every month or so)...and i'm already in Japan...i don't need to go much further...and, even if i had all of my CVs, i've just learnt that i cannot rely on them for another landing in Japan...they simply cannot stand against japanese LBAs.
 
So...call me crazy...call me idiot...call me dreamer...but i still don't think my idea of a Kami-CVTF is that nonesense.
 
However...i'll refrain myself from doing stupid things...promise[8|]

[JohnDillworth]

However...i'll refrain myself from doing stupid things...promise

That your penguin for sale on Ebay?

[GreyJoy]

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

However...i'll refrain myself from doing stupid things...promise

That you penguin for sale on Ebay?

The penguin is dead on the field of honour[8D]

[Knucles2]

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin

I was off for work, came back, peeked into the thread and read something about Kamikaze carriers......made my day.

Good yer stepped back from that one or I would have posted this

I'm sure GJ is greatfull you refrained from posting this

[princep01]

No, not everyone is opposed to a "kamikaze" CV strike against KB. I think Alfred laid out a fair operational plan for making it happen on reasonable terms.

When others dither, I paraphrase a famous man's wise words, there are those that ask why; I ask, why not? Why the hell not, Ser Greyjoy?? It would be great fun and has a pretty good chance of destroying the last real naval threat he has.

Don't let the nay-sayers stop you from bold experimentation. What response would you have expected from a conservative player like CR if you had told him of your move on the Kuriles and northern Japan? Huh? What? You know what..... He is an excellent player, but he has a very different style than you.

So, put me in the "Do it" column and quit sniveling about. It's a pretty good idea....and, again, will be great fun.

Your stranded on th ebeach friend,
princepBolton

[Cribtop]

princep's a fellow Texan, so I'm loathe to disagree... but the kami CV plan reminds me of an old saying - "Death rides a fast horse."

I guess the point of the naysayers is: GJ, why - at this moment - do you need to destroy the KB? Other than avenging the victims of Sadogashima, what strategic or operational imperative does it serve? Why is that superior to using the CVs, for now, as a fleet in being, protect the SLoC to CONUS, bomb Japan into flaming ruin, and then come back when you have superiority again?

[witpqs]

To paraphrase an old saying I use from time to time:

"Pour a half a glass of water and some people see the glass as half empty. Other people see the glass as half full. GreyJoy just drinks the water!"

Bravo, man!

[princep01]

Ah, my friend and fellow traveler, disagreement is the very heart of invention. Once we would have debated whether the world was flat or round....but, the end result the result would be the discovery of a whole new world. We'll write a brief on the strategic value/failure of the thing after the fact.

Forward, Ser Greyjoy....for glory (and to discover if it can be done successfully). You have already won the game in the hearts of your earnest readers. Let us go forth and discover. Bold initiatives to solve big problems. If we fail, we at least fail grandly.

I will, of course, stay on the New Jersey....someone must survive to tell the story:).

princepBolton

[cwDeici]

Greyjoy: Keep the remaining ships safe. Hokkaido must not be lost. This is fair, both sides have swamped bombers on targets.

Continue to firebomb Japan at night, historically it did an immense amount of damage.

[princep01]

Ser Greyjoy, what a handsome lad you once were. Alas, that portrait is one of you before you made my acquaintance and became a guest at Dreadfort. That bit about you being a ....well, you know....that's a bit overblown, wouldn't you say?

princepBolton

[Cribtop]

Princep, one thing on which we agree - this is the coolest game EVAH! Well done, GJ.

[&o]

[hades1001]

Sorry to interrupt, but can anyone please point out an combat that carriers react to enemy carriers that is 7/8 hex away?

[Canoerebel]

ORIGINAL: princep01

...What response would you have expected from a conservative player like CR if you had told him of your move on the Kuriles and northern Japan? Huh? What? You know what..... He is an excellent player, but he has a very different style than you.

princepBolton

I hasten to say that I am currently involved in my fifth WitP or AE PBEM match. In those five matches, I've invaded the Kuriles, Sikhalin Island or Hokkaido three times...and I've invaded China by sea twice.

[Canoerebel]

ORIGINAL: hades1001

Sorry to interrupt, but can anyone please point out an combat that carriers react to enemy carriers that is 7/8 hex away?

Yeah, I had it happen in just about every match I played - most notoriously in my AE game against Miller than ended about two years ago ("Shattered Vow" is the AAR). In fact, I had carriers reacting against orders, with react set to zero, with carrier TFs set to follow merchant TFs or combat TFs, and under just about every condition possible including long-range reaction. I finally put a stop to it in my last PBEM (vs. Q-Ball) by parking my carriers in Capetown for the entire game (seriously) and in my current game by assigning them the worst commanders possible (the ones who have low aggression and who couldn't steer a tricycle down Broadway without winding up in Trinity Church's pulpit.

[hades1001]

So how many hex away is the enemy and how many hex did you react? Did you launched a naval attack?

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

ORIGINAL: hades1001

Sorry to interrupt, but can anyone please point out an combat that carriers react to enemy carriers that is 7/8 hex away?

Yeah, I had it happen in just about every match I played - most notoriously in my AE game against Miller than ended about two years ago ("Shattered Vow" is the AAR). In fact, I had carriers reacting against orders, with react set to zero, with carrier TFs set to follow merchant TFs or combat TFs, and under just about every condition possible including long-range reaction. I finally put a stop to it in my last PBEM (vs. Q-Ball) by parking my carriers in Capetown for the entire game (seriously) and in my current game by assigning them the worst commanders possible (the ones who have low aggression and who couldn't steer a tricycle down Broadway without winding up in Trinity Church's pulpit.

[Canoerebel]

That was two or three years ago, so I'm a bit fuzzy on the details. The worst one I remember occurred near Morotai - the two sides reacted from long range - perhaps eight to ten hexes, which proved devastating for the Allies (react always proves devastating for the Allies). I lost all kinds of ships.

Oh, earlier in that same game I had another devastating react in which my carriers - against every conceivable precaution except that I did do the unthinkable and give my carrier TFs competent commanders - reacted away from critical land-based CAP and, in doing so, left critical invasion transports without the carrier CAP they were supposed to have. On that occasion I lost my carriers AND my transports.

I hate the react feature. But we're stuck with it (seriously - the folks that make these decisions said a few years ago that this one was locked in).

[LoBaron]

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy
So...call me crazy...call me idiot...call me dreamer...but i still don't think my idea of a Kami-CVTF is that nonesense.

I´d rather call you a creative thinker, but still, please don´t.

It will not work the way you think.
No need to repeat all others´input, but considering such situations you need to think purely on chances of success/failure
(sp. "wargame the plan").
A plan containing many if´s and a couple of tradeoffs, has a high probability to go wrong, or to not result in the outcome expected, even if successful.


If I am trying a stunt, I play my own devil´s advocate.

If I consider using high value units (and looking at your situation CVEs are high value units) and I wargame a high risk/high benefit
plan, if the chances are approaching 50% that it will fail on a rather extreme level or not bring the benefit I desire, I stomp it.

Sorry to say, but "Plan CVE Kami" looks like it can be a spectacular success, but I´d rate the chance of this happening somewhere in
the 10% area. Radar will need to play your game for you to succeed, always the worst prerequisite.

[EUBanana]

ORIGINAL: princep01

Ser Greyjoy, what a handsome lad you once were. Alas, that portrait is one of you before you made my acquaintance and became a guest at Dreadfort. That bit about you being a ....well, you know....that's a bit overblown, wouldn't you say?

princepBolton

[:D][X(]