The Trauma of '42: Crackaces (Allies) vs. njp72 (IJ)

[Crackaces]

Anyway .. a click on the link in my signature and a look at the blog (David Trinidad) has my profile for the University of Arizona .....

I have had enough .. I give up to the superior ones in this forum ..

[zuluhour]

[&o][&o][&o]
All hail the superior ones!

[zuluhour]

Good luck Aces!

[Crackaces]

ORIGINAL: zuluhour

Good luck Aces!

Thanks! It is unfortunate that the internet facilitates the tactic of wining arguments by falsely demeaning ones adversary rather than simply debate the facts. The more right the adversary -- the more personal the attacks. Harlich (2012).

The game is going in a very interesting direction in that my opponent is ignoring the Philippines entirely in the first 2 weeks and using these forces to seize Maylay & Singapore. Also the IJ are securing the Solomon's quickly and moving at lighting pace to seize the DEI .. it will be a real challenge to solve this puzzle!

[BBfanboy]

Ignoring the Philippines? Does that include no air strikes on the subs in port? Those S-boats with working torps could have a bit of a "happy time"! Check the captains before you send them out - half of them are brass polishers.
Good luck!

[Crackaces]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Ignoring the Philippines? Does that include no air strikes on the subs in port? Those S-boats with working torps could have a bit of a "happy time"! Check the captains before you send them out - half of them are brass polishers.
Good luck!

Subs are already patrolling and scouting mainly. I have started rebasing them with the intent of replacing the commanders .. but in the meantime forces are rolling over the top of them and triggering helpful intelligence.

We are on Turn 10 and I have extracted everything mobile except for the MTB/PT boats ... leaving the troops to dig in for what I am thinking an irresistible force that will redirect from the Singapore campaign. I rather think this is ingenious.

[BBfanboy]

I'm betting njp72 read about Bullwinkle's defence of Singapore and decided to take no chances on letting it be resupplied or reinforced. Also, several other players have suggested in various AARs that the Philippines can be isolated and mopped up after Singapore and the DEI are secured.
Anyway, good on him for trying it out! Makes for a different start to the game.

Do you have any thoughts on his playing style that you are willing to share or do you prefer to keep psyops to yourself?

[Crackaces]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

I'm betting dennishe read about Bullwinkle's defence of Singapore and decided to take no chances on letting it be resupplied or reinforced. Also, several other players have suggested in various AARs that the Philippines can be isolated and mopped up after Singapore and the DEI are secured.
Anyway, good on him for trying it out! Makes for a different start to the game.

Do you have any thoughts on his playing style that you are willing to share or do you prefer to keep psyops to yourself?

I do not at all mind sharing my thoughts -- unless sharing my thoughts is going to result in a personal attack as the start of this thread. I am not really into the psyops thing because I see this as a journey trying to solve a puzzle as opposed to a vehicle to humiliate my opponent [or as it looks in the first week ...get humiliated by my opponent! [8D]]

Clearly in my mind njp72 is executing a very well thought out plan. I do not yet see a wasted move. The overall strategy is to isolate chunks and then deal with the salient. For example, taking Tulgi first, stationing BF's and it looks like a AVD? to support Mavis? extending airpower and then Shortlands and Lae, and soon Rabual .... The other strategy I find extremely interesting is to use the CV's to isolate areas and deny access, rather than senselessly hunt down unimportant things. Thus the MB KB has isolated Kendrai east even though "juicier" targets are detected west. Thus it has been very difficult to slip a SCTF underneath and take out an invasion TF.

So, I believe njp72 is effectively isolating huge chunks of territory and then will mop up the remains later.

The other interesting maneuver in the first week is in China. Two pinchers are headed north and south of Ichang while I am in vain trying to set up an MLR West of all that open area. He is setting up multiple possible thrusts rather than just head-on straight into my MLR. I suspect he will find a weak point and ground bomb with an armored strike ..

Finally, njp72 is doing an excellent job of anticipating my TF's and putting submarines to intercept me forces. This includes intercepting TF's out in the middle of the Pacific! These are TF's going way out of the way to avoid contact and yet .. I move and there is a submarine!

We shall see how things develop but njp72 is not blowing his wad on a AV but is executing a well-thought out strategy of lasting until 1946. This should be very interesting to watch unfold.

[Crackaces]

The map below shows the early IJ strategy. The PI is totally quiet and the Allies are building forts with what few supplies exist. In fact the whole South China Sea is quiet! So where are these forces?

[Crackaces]

In a quick IJ blitzkrieg .. forces hit Mersing and Palembang .. it is now clear that the IJ intend to use the historical PI forces to ensure an early seizure of precious bases and resources. The Boise and Houston barely missed an invasion TF. [:(]

The IJ are also quickly moving CV's to cut off any ships from finding refuge at Darwin. The DEI is now isolated from reinforcement and is now a very dangerous place to operate.

I have discovered many difference between scenario #1 and DBB in terms of OOB and placement. Many more platforms are in harms way at the beginning .. leaving the Allies with a big decision of how to move platforms where they can provide support for the war effort. This has been a challenge. In the meantime, IJ submarines are doing an excellent job of patrolling some of my out of the way shipping lanes and doing an excellent job of ridding my of the hassle of configuring logistics ... [8D] I do know there is enough ships eventually to support more than enough shipping .. but early on I am taking it in the shorts ...

[Crackaces]

I was going to update this thread regularly, instead I have decided to update things as the game develops. So far, the IJ strategy in the DEI has been most interesting in using PI forces to capture Hong Kong early as well as invade Mersing ...

[Alfred]

An early move on Mersing (and Palembang for that matter too) can be very expensive for Japan if Allied torpedo bombers are deployed. Plus Palembang, unsupported by nearby Japanese airbases, can be hit by the Dutch hefalumps adding to oil field destruction. On naval attack the hefalumps are quite weak; not so when targeting terrestrial facilities.

Also the early enemy move doesn't mean that running to Singapore is the only valid Allied response. Maintaining a port on the Strait of Malacca can be a viable tactic, both for shipment of supply in and eventual evacuation benefiting in both instances from shorter SLOCs than normally are available if everyone has run to Singapore. In the process you leave behind in Singapore a much slimmer garrison whose rations will last a lot longer than normal and thereby provide a tough resistance.

As always there is a counter to every move.

Alfred

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

Well the conversation started pretty arrogantly [8D] So you know from which I speak from .. I was a systems architect for Lucent Technologies ..solving software problems was a way of life I have never flown fighter jets, but I do understand math, systems thinking, and programing algorithums [:'(]

I think a minor step in the right direction would be very doable and worthwhile .. simply abstract intercept like the ol' Luftwaffe game .. first base crossed initatates detection/ intercept as per the current rules with current leaky CAP/LRCAP rules. That is the first base crossed becomes a "target" for intercept purposes

The ramifications of the current system means concentrating aircraft at potential targets and generating huge furballs ... which also taxes the current system .. . games like Greyjoy vs. Radier stopped because of these furballs ....If I know I at least get a crack with my early CAP .. I use them on defense rather than focus on sweep or whatever to get an offensive operation in ...

Anyway there are lots of constraints that keep this engine from being an historical similation and no amount of home rules is going to get players to get this game to act as a similator ..so .. I gleefully accept this is an excellent game!

I'm not a systems architect but I can see a lot of ways this could be gamed too. If as the attacker I send a 2-plane element to max range I can trigger every CAP package on the way and use up defender op points doing nothing useful. Or, as the defender, I have my carefully rendered CAP to protect my vital whatever base go galivanting off in a tail-chase on faster transiting bombers, leaving the base they're supposed to protect naked.

I also think witpqs brings up an excellent point. Neither side had integrated air defense systems with real time comms to alert downstream bases of approaching strikes. This isn't the ETO or Germany.

You could probably put in ways to constrain each and every air unit on each turn to prevent these sorts of ploys, but pretty soon it becomes Bombing the Empire and not a 3D balanced game of naval/land/air. Not every theater is Burma either. It's a dense case.

[Crackaces]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

Well the conversation started pretty arrogantly [8D] So you know from which I speak from .. I was a systems architect for Lucent Technologies ..solving software problems was a way of life I have never flown fighter jets, but I do understand math, systems thinking, and programing algorithums [:'(]

I think a minor step in the right direction would be very doable and worthwhile .. simply abstract intercept like the ol' Luftwaffe game .. first base crossed initatates detection/ intercept as per the current rules with current leaky CAP/LRCAP rules. That is the first base crossed becomes a "target" for intercept purposes

The ramifications of the current system means concentrating aircraft at potential targets and generating huge furballs ... which also taxes the current system .. . games like Greyjoy vs. Radier stopped because of these furballs ....If I know I at least get a crack with my early CAP .. I use them on defense rather than focus on sweep or whatever to get an offensive operation in ...

Anyway there are lots of constraints that keep this engine from being an historical similation and no amount of home rules is going to get players to get this game to act as a similator ..so .. I gleefully accept this is an excellent game!

I'm not a systems architect but I can see a lot of ways this could be gamed too. If as the attacker I send a 2-plane element to max range I can trigger every CAP package on the way and use up defender op points doing nothing useful. Or, as the defender, I have my carefully rendered CAP to protect my vital whatever base go galivanting off in a tail-chase on faster transiting bombers, leaving the base they're supposed to protect naked.

I also think witpqs brings up an excellent point. Neither side had integrated air defense systems with real time comms to alert downstream bases of approaching strikes. This isn't the ETO or Germany.

You could probably put in ways to constrain each and every air unit on each turn to prevent these sorts of ploys, but pretty soon it becomes Bombing the Empire and not a 3D balanced game of naval/land/air. Not every theater is Burma either. It's a dense case.

Hmmm Interesting .... I can buy that detection at the target makes a more interesting game. One premise I might disagree with is the thought of "ETO or Germany". I believe a problem is that we look at Scenario #1 to compare history, and then play scenario #2, which is nothing like history. So for the games that have lasted to 1944, like Rader vs. Greyjoy you get a situation of having to defend targets rather than paths to targets. Thus the cloak and appear at a target becomes a real problem.

My thoughts on a more dynamic interception algorithm are based on my AH Luftwaffe experience, which I enjoyed and thought was a 1/2 way decent Operational portrayal. That game presented the defense with many options including defending forward.

The current model works for CV's because there was rarely detection beyond the target. However, the model breaks down when you have multiple base targets possible and the defense has to cover a wide range giving the offense a real advantage.

Things like 2 plane gamey moves are solvable by algorithms such as probability outcomes based on % of strike package. That is all platforms in the AO are considered for intercept by platforms on LRCAP to that range. Then calculate P((package) / package + rest of platforms in the area)) for each strike package. Move interceptors one hex in that direction. Allow for react into an adjacent hex .. do this until combat done. This would cause multiple intercepts and multiple results. I believe in simulation this produces a series of combats rather than one big furball over a target. In my vision the battle looks like the current surface actions I see with react set .... with some additional constraints such as probability to intercept based on package size ... However, you might be right Moose that using the WitP Ship model and modifying it will not work because of scalability of the numbers of air platforms and the use of small packages. We do stress the ship system with 1 ship TF's ....

Ok .. .good post Moose ...

[Crackaces]

The situation in DEI has become dire as far as 40 AKL's now trying to escape the claws of 2 MKB's and 2 SAG's. I am suspecting a lot of ships to meet Davey Jone's locker ...Also one of the MKB's is about to intercept slower ships leaving Bativia .. it is going to be a mess ...

Alfred's strategy is interesting .. make the IJ pay for an early attack on Palembang but strategic attack .. one problem is there is already 70 fighters at the base .. but a night attack might be worth taking an oil point out ..we shall see ...

My spidy senses are up .. I am thinking a major objective is to seize Colombo/Ceylon .. The next 10 turns are focused on taking precautions .... I think 2000 AV and level 4 forts should be enough to make the move fatal.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

Well the conversation started pretty arrogantly [8D] So you know from which I speak from .. I was a systems architect for Lucent Technologies ..solving software problems was a way of life I have never flown fighter jets, but I do understand math, systems thinking, and programing algorithums [:'(]

I think a minor step in the right direction would be very doable and worthwhile .. simply abstract intercept like the ol' Luftwaffe game .. first base crossed initatates detection/ intercept as per the current rules with current leaky CAP/LRCAP rules. That is the first base crossed becomes a "target" for intercept purposes

The ramifications of the current system means concentrating aircraft at potential targets and generating huge furballs ... which also taxes the current system .. . games like Greyjoy vs. Radier stopped because of these furballs ....If I know I at least get a crack with my early CAP .. I use them on defense rather than focus on sweep or whatever to get an offensive operation in ...

Anyway there are lots of constraints that keep this engine from being an historical similation and no amount of home rules is going to get players to get this game to act as a similator ..so .. I gleefully accept this is an excellent game!

I'm not a systems architect but I can see a lot of ways this could be gamed too. If as the attacker I send a 2-plane element to max range I can trigger every CAP package on the way and use up defender op points doing nothing useful. Or, as the defender, I have my carefully rendered CAP to protect my vital whatever base go galivanting off in a tail-chase on faster transiting bombers, leaving the base they're supposed to protect naked.

I also think witpqs brings up an excellent point. Neither side had integrated air defense systems with real time comms to alert downstream bases of approaching strikes. This isn't the ETO or Germany.

You could probably put in ways to constrain each and every air unit on each turn to prevent these sorts of ploys, but pretty soon it becomes Bombing the Empire and not a 3D balanced game of naval/land/air. Not every theater is Burma either. It's a dense case.

Hmmm Interesting .... I can buy that detection at the target makes a more interesting game. One premise I might disagree with is the thought of "ETO or Germany". I believe a problem is that we look at Scenario #1 to compare history, and then play scenario #2, which is nothing like history. So for the games that have lasted to 1944, like Rader vs. Greyjoy you get a situation of having to defend targets rather than paths to targets. Thus the cloak and appear at a target becomes a real problem.

My thoughts on a more dynamic interception algorithm are based on my AH Luftwaffe experience, which I enjoyed and thought was a 1/2 way decent Operational portrayal. That game presented the defense with many options including defending forward.

The current model works for CV's because there was rarely detection beyond the target. However, the model breaks down when you have multiple base targets possible and the defense has to cover a wide range giving the offense a real advantage.

Things like 2 plane gamey moves are solvable by algorithms such as probability outcomes based on % of strike package. That is all platforms in the AO are considered for intercept by platforms on LRCAP to that range. Then calculate P((package) / package + rest of platforms in the area)) for each strike package. Move interceptors one hex in that direction. Allow for react into an adjacent hex .. do this until combat done. This would cause multiple intercepts and multiple results. I believe in simulation this produces a series of combats rather than one big furball over a target. In my vision the battle looks like the current surface actions I see with react set .... with some additional constraints such as probability to intercept based on package size ... However, you might be right Moose that using the WitP Ship model and modifying it will not work because of scalability of the numbers of air platforms and the use of small packages. We do stress the ship system with 1 ship TF's ....

Ok .. .good post Moose ...

A lot of ways into this post. Let me try to group . . .

Scen 1 vs Scen 2. I agree 2 is ahistorical, but nothing in the differences is tactical air combat related. Scen 2 has resource windfalls, more DDs, extra LCUs, and a different pilot replacement model, but A2A is no different between them.

ETO vs. PTO. You simply can't adopt German air defense norms to the PTO. Germany had a continental defense problem. They had connected, land-line comms, not Morse-code tactical nets vulnerable to Pacific weather or as slow as Morse is. They had radar. They had dense flak zones over heavy urban environments. The AE designers had to devise air algorithms that work not only for Burma and CV vs. CV, the extremes of the distribution, but also for island chains such as the Marianas or the gaggle near Timor. You can't hand-wave fighter-direction infrastructure into place for Japan. They didn't have it. Handing off repsonsibility for a transitting Allied strike wasn't possible in the way it was for Germany, or even GB in the Battle of Britain. The geography, hardware, and C&C didn't exist in the Pacific. Every CO at every island with some CAP had to decide what to do on his own. Some of them were near help, as in dense Burma. Some of them were out on a limb alone, as at Marcus I. All of them had to assess the size and composition of the passing raid with very imperfect information.

Game phases. To really do what you propose you need to give the game, and the planning player, visibility and control intra-phase to time slice the strike phasing. So each package passes by each possible interception base in sequence, with interception decisions made in hourly sequence and the results of those (fuel, ammo, damage, pilot fatigue) carried forward in data structures to be used in later phase slices. The game isn't built that way. The 12-hour phases are deeply embedded in multiple algorithms. Sweeps and strikes get sequenced based on randoms and interactions behind the scenes based on multiple stats, but that's it. A 12-hour phase is the operating "chunk", not hours or fractions of hours as you would need in some geographies such as the HI in air-defense terms. The flight times between some HI bases is minutes, not hours.

Player workload. You could devise an interface to get very granular in player orders to do all this, and some games which are purely strategic bombing games have such interfaces. But as above, they are designed fundamentally to play the air game, not a five-year integrated air/land/sea operational-level macro game. If players had to not only worry about point-defense of bases as now, but also insert sensitivty inputs to allow degrees of freedom for mid-transit intercepts by their CAP, the per-turn planning would become immense, especially in the late war. And there would still be randoms, leading to even more frustration by the ADHD player crowd when their fighters "didn't do what I told them to do!"

Interesting topic, but I think the devs considered point defense versus alternatives and went that way for good reasons. Our system isn't perfect, but I think with LRCAP and range spinners it gives players about all the flex most can handle on a per-turn basis. Make a day turn take 4-5 hours to input and people stop playing the thing.

[MAurelius]

I know I am a bit late with that post, but he did the same thing to me in our game... no invasion of PI at all - and it got me stunned as I pulled everything out too early....

he will however throw the kitchen sink at you in time and no forts will make a difference there - of course this game was DBB A - so no stackin limits which might change everything!

[Crackaces]

Interesting topic, but I think the devs considered point defense versus alternatives and went that way for good reasons. Our system isn't perfect, but I think with LRCAP and range spinners it gives players about all the flex most can handle on a per-turn basis. Make a day turn take 4-5 hours to input and people stop playing the thing.

People are happy with the system .. so I understand .. it just hurts the person who intuitively thinks "hey I need to use my fighters to intercept at 1 hex away when in reality the target is 7 hexes away and no aircraft get involved .. "nothing to see here ..."

As far as phases .. the ships move in phases and intercept quite nicely .. the same algorithms might extend .. except for the need to model a radio traffic network that cannot relay the fact that a whole bunch of airplanes have just flown overhead [8D]

I am not going to post much here but I will try and keep the AAR up to date with meaningful info that corresponds with some aspect that might be new ....

[Crackaces]

Below demonstrates an India invasion as of Feb '42. The IJ have forces pinned at Colombo and this turn IJ forces at Bombay get roughed up a bit. The extended map offers an additional problem for the Allies in that forces can be intercepted going from Aden to Abadan/Karachi .. on the other hand it will take a commitment from the IJ to continue this embargo ..

[Crackaces]

The only problem I see with ignoring PI and Singapore and invading India is that it takes awhile to build the forces to challenge the IJ. Thus in my opinion it might make a more boring game. I would suspect CanoeRebel taking more risks than I and making the IJ's life hell .. [8D] but the best risk management dictates keeping losses to a minimum and then attacking with overwhelming forces when the time is right ..