Decline & Fall AAR

World in Flames is the computer version of Australian Design Group classic board game. World In Flames is a highly detailed game covering the both Europe and Pacific Theaters of Operations during World War II. If you want grand strategy this game is for you.

Moderator: Shannon V. OKeets

User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: Decline & Fall AAR

Post by composer99 »

To begin with, Japan has to decide what to scrap.

Japan has no particular reason to scrap land units - it will need all the army it can get to defend Japan, given the new map scale.

Japan also has no particular reason to scrap naval units, if for no reason other than that it basically won't be building any (save, perhaps, completing carriers in the construction pool). The Japanese will scrap older submarines and sealift to make sure the stuff it has is recent and decent. After all, new sealift builds after the scenario starts are basically a waste of build points, and likely as not so are new sub builds.

On the other hand, Japan probably wants to aggressively scrap older fighters and bombers. Japan also wants to scrap particularly paltry carrier planes, although here it can run into a bit of trouble: if its random carrier plane draws are too "heavy" it could run into trouble fitting planes on all its carriers, especially the light ones.

That said, the US and its Essex-class carriers will be running around with high-powered CVPs that will munch through anything particularly subpar that the Japanese send up, in a Turkey Shoot kind of way. An empty carrier that sits in port and gets a plane on it in 1945 is better than a carrier with a crappy air wing that gets sent out and both carrier and air wing end up at the bottom of the ocean.

Here is Japan looking at the options for land unit scrapping and deciding not to scrap any.

Image
Attachments
0024japan..ndunits.jpg
0024japan..ndunits.jpg (248.95 KiB) Viewed 875 times
~ Composer99
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: Decline & Fall AAR

Post by composer99 »

Japan looks at and scraps some submarines.

Image
Attachments
0025japan..pingsub.jpg
0025japan..pingsub.jpg (186.4 KiB) Viewed 875 times
~ Composer99
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: Decline & Fall AAR

Post by composer99 »

Japan examines its sealift options and aggressively scraps.

(Normally I would not scrap AMPH at all, but Japan begins with but one AMPH and has no opportunity to build more - any it did build would arrive on the last turn of the game, by which point I rather doubt the Japanese Navy will need it. Or even exist.)

Image
Attachments
0026japan..inglift.jpg
0026japan..inglift.jpg (201.99 KiB) Viewed 875 times
~ Composer99
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: Decline & Fall AAR

Post by composer99 »

Japan junks some old fighters. The Zeroes stay in, because of their wonderful long range.

Image
Attachments
0027japan..pingftr.jpg
0027japan..pingftr.jpg (259.91 KiB) Viewed 875 times
~ Composer99
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: Decline & Fall AAR

Post by composer99 »

Japan scraps a whole lotta bombers.

Originally I didn't think I'd be this aggressive scrapping, but Japanese land bombers are pretty crappy, and their navs are generally just as good at tactical bombing.

So might as well have the good stuff on the map and in the force pool and build it all.

(I only kept as many 2-cost bombers as I did because they will all start on the map or in reserves.)

Image
Attachments
0028japan..pinglnd.jpg
0028japan..pinglnd.jpg (217.25 KiB) Viewed 875 times
~ Composer99
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: Decline & Fall AAR

Post by composer99 »

Japan ditches the lone crappy NAV.

In a 1939 campaign game I'd build it and throw it in to convoy defences. But for this game... nah.

Image
Attachments
0029japan..pingnav.jpg
0029japan..pingnav.jpg (232.83 KiB) Viewed 875 times
~ Composer99
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: Decline & Fall AAR

Post by composer99 »

Japan junks a lot of older carrier planes (CVP).

I'm a bit worried how this will turn out, but as I said, better to have an idle carrier that will still be around in 1945 when I can fit a plane on it, than to have one with too weak an air wing that gets blasted to smithereens.

Image
Attachments
0030japan..pingcvp.jpg
0030japan..pingcvp.jpg (272.03 KiB) Viewed 875 times
~ Composer99
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: Decline & Fall AAR

Post by composer99 »

Japan's strategic thinking and set up will just have to follow later.

(Also, for future reference, I won't be as thorough in showing scrapping, in fact, I likely won't show a screenshot at all.)
~ Composer99
User avatar
Neilster
Posts: 3011
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2003 1:52 pm
Location: Devonport, Tasmania, Australia

RE: Decline & Fall AAR

Post by Neilster »

ORIGINAL: composer99

Well, RAW §1.2 defines air units thusly:
An aircraft unit represents 250 aircraft in 1939 gradually increasing to 500 aircraft by 1945.

Assuming a smooth progression by year, an air unit in 1944 represents approximately 450-460 aircraft, so if the Allies put every single eligible air unit into the UK (including those designated for Europe generally or even any map) they can just about reach that amount.

So overall the Allies seem short on air units. (This might be a game balance thing, as if the Germans have anything close to their historical amount of aircraft, they would be very badly outnumbered - as it is if the Allies max out their air unit commitment vs Germany they end up with 51 on-map units vs. 19 for the Germans - a 2.7:1 advantage. This advantage is further magnified by the way German airpower is spread out, whereas the Allies can concentrate their forces after seeing the German setup.)
Yes. I thought about that natural increase but it got me thinking. If a 1939 German fighter unit survived into, say, 1944, it appears superficially that 250 1939 fighters are about as strong as 500 P-51Ds. Obviously those original aircraft have been replaced with superior types and I suppose we can assume that on top of normal unit production there is an invisible replacement mechanism built into the game mechanics.

Cheers, Neilster
Cheers, Neilster
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: Decline & Fall AAR

Post by composer99 »

Japan Set Up Notes & Overall Strategy - Part I

With regards to Japan's set up, it is clear to me after some thought that Japan has an extraordinarily more complicated situation to consider than China does in order to set up properly, or indeed at all.

(Indeed, it is enormously more difficult to set Japan up for this scenario than for, say, the 1939 game, even though Japan doesn't have "the long game" to plan for here).

To whit, Japan has to take into consideration:

Japan vs. USSR
- how to build up in Manchuria and defend it from an inevitable Soviet attack (the non-aggression treaty between the two powers will delay this until the USSR is built up sufficiently - the way non-aggression treaties work in (M)WiF is that to break one you have to have sufficient garrison in the border areas, and the amount of garrison required declines over time).
- whether or not, if the opportunity arises, Japan should attack Vladivostok

Japan vs. China
- just this front requires much more thought by Japan than it does by China
- Japan wants to hold on to Hanoi (which China has set up to threaten), Canton, Shanghai, and the resources it holds in China for as long as possible, and keep the Chinese out of Manchuria

Japan vs. Commonwealth (CW)
- considering just the land war between Japan & the CW, Japan has to figure out how badly it wants to commit to keeping Burma
- Japan also has to consider how to keep the CW from advancing far enough to threaten actual objective hexes

Japan vs. USA
- Japan has to consider the overall naval war with the Allies (see below)
- Japan has to figure out how to funnel US attacks to minimize the loss rate of objective hexes and of oil
- Japan has to balance defending overseas objectives and ports to slow the US advance vs. defending the Japanese home country from invasion, especially on the different map scale

Japan vs. Allied Navies
- Japan has to protect its primary convoy chain open against submarine and even carrier group raiding
- Japan has to keep its carrier fleet as an effective threat in being to check the US advance
- Japan has to carefully consider how to base and use land-based air to slow the Allies down
- Japan has to consider when and how to sacrifice its fleet (yes, even the carriers), either in drips and drabs or in big chunks

I would have to say that starting off trying to figure this all out in media res is much more difficult than doing so when you have had a whole game to build up unit density and engage in planning.
~ Composer99
User avatar
Orm
Posts: 33810
Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 7:53 pm
Location: Sweden

RE: Decline & Fall AAR

Post by Orm »

ORIGINAL: composer99

Japan Set Up Notes & Overall Strategy - Part I

With regards to Japan's set up, it is clear to me after some thought that Japan has an extraordinarily more complicated situation to consider than China does in order to set up properly, or indeed at all.

(Indeed, it is enormously more difficult to set Japan up for this scenario than for, say, the 1939 game, even though Japan doesn't have "the long game" to plan for here).

To whit, Japan has to take into consideration:

Japan vs. USSR
- how to build up in Manchuria and defend it from an inevitable Soviet attack (the non-aggression treaty between the two powers will delay this until the USSR is built up sufficiently - the way non-aggression treaties work in (M)WiF is that to break one you have to have sufficient garrison in the border areas, and the amount of garrison required declines over time).
- whether or not, if the opportunity arises, Japan should attack Vladivostok

Japan vs. China
- just this front requires much more thought by Japan than it does by China
- Japan wants to hold on to Hanoi (which China has set up to threaten), Canton, Shanghai, and the resources it holds in China for as long as possible, and keep the Chinese out of Manchuria

Japan vs. Commonwealth (CW)
- considering just the land war between Japan & the CW, Japan has to figure out how badly it wants to commit to keeping Burma
- Japan also has to consider how to keep the CW from advancing far enough to threaten actual objective hexes

Japan vs. USA
- Japan has to consider the overall naval war with the Allies (see below)
- Japan has to figure out how to funnel US attacks to minimize the loss rate of objective hexes and of oil
- Japan has to balance defending overseas objectives and ports to slow the US advance vs. defending the Japanese home country from invasion, especially on the different map scale

Japan vs. Allied Navies
- Japan has to protect its primary convoy chain open against submarine and even carrier group raiding
- Japan has to keep its carrier fleet as an effective threat in being to check the US advance
- Japan has to carefully consider how to base and use land-based air to slow the Allies down
- Japan has to consider when and how to sacrifice its fleet (yes, even the carriers), either in drips and drabs or in big chunks

I would have to say that starting off trying to figure this all out in media res is much more difficult than doing so when you have had a whole game to build up unit density and engage in planning.
I recommend that you retreat from Burma as fast as possible. You can't really defend it all and there is not much of value in keeping Burma anyway.
Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

A government is a body of people; usually, notably, ungoverned. - Quote from Firefly
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: Decline & Fall AAR

Post by composer99 »

Because my next section of Japanese strategy discussion for this scenario will be "big picture" stuff I'm going to post some screen captures of the big picture (I have to post two pictures because of the measly size of my laptop monitor).



Image
Attachments
0031japan..ewnorth.jpg
0031japan..ewnorth.jpg (263.14 KiB) Viewed 875 times
~ Composer99
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: Decline & Fall AAR

Post by composer99 »

Here's the south of the PTO that Japan is interested in.

Image
Attachments
0032japan..ewsouth.jpg
0032japan..ewsouth.jpg (314.97 KiB) Viewed 875 times
~ Composer99
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: Decline & Fall AAR

Post by composer99 »

Finally, for re-emphasis here's the overview map of political control.

Image

Japan Set Up Notes & Overall Strategy - Part II

The five "big picture" factors Japan has to think about, before thinking about individual fronts and sectors, are time, objectives, oil, production, and units.

Time
Time is almost, but not quite, on Japan's side. The Allies are the ones on the clock. Japan can win if they can't organize their conquest quickly enough.

In order to run the clock out on the Allies, Japan has to make them waste impulses and turns.

Japan can make the Allies waste impulses by sending out pickets of naval forces and "speed bumps" at the front. Japan can make them waste turns by ending them prematurely (e.g. by passing).

In addition, fortunately for Japan, the Western Allies are constrained by the ongoing war against Germany. Once the USSR is at war with Japan, it will not be so constrained as the kind of activities it needs to do to fight Japan (land moves and attacks) are the same ones it needs to do to fight Germany.

Objectives
Japan begins this scenario with 10 objectives. As I noted previously, it historically ended the war, at the time of its capitulation, with 9. The game rules expect Japan to have 5 at the end of the scenario for a draw.

Therefore, Japan's goal is to control 6 objectives at the end of the scenario. As such, Japan can afford to give up up to 4 objectives.

Truk and Rabaul, remote as they are, and given unit constraints (see below), are good choices to give up. The only difficulty is that they must be defended enough to cost the US precious time seizing them, but not well enough to make the Allies decide simply to bypass them. Over-committing to defend these two objectives may cost the Japanese if they do not have enough other units elsewhere.

All other objectives, in the meantime, must be defended as strongly as possible.

Japan should also look to the possibility of desperate grabs at Allied-controlled objectives: either a counter-attack against, say, an invasion of Truk, or attacking places such as Colombo, Aden, Dutch Harbour, Diego Suarez, or even Vladivostok. Of course, such ploys must be timed carefully so that, if successful, the Allies don't have time to recapture them or, if they do, they instead miss out on capturing one of the objectives in Japan's core area.

Oil
Of course, to be of any use, Japan's forces need oil. Unfortunately, while in a normal 1939 game Japan normally builds its synthetic oil plants (if that optional rule is in play), in this scenario Japan does not have any available. This means the 4 oil points in the Netherlands East Indies (NEI) are all Japan has to be getting on with (talk about your 'low-carb' diet). (Strictly speaking, Japan controls an oil in Burma, but I'm not expecting to be able to control it for long enough to benefit from it.)

Thus does the oil tail wag the strategy dog: to remain effective, Japan has to commit to keeping a convoy line open from its oil to each region it wishes to base oil-dependent units in, fighting off Allied raids against the convoy line, and defending the oil hexes themselves from invasion.

As such, Japan has to stockpile oil beyond its initial allotment (a mere 3 oil points). Tentatively, Japan plans to stock up on oil in Japan proper and in one alternate major port in the South China Sea. (Japan would like a third such stockpile, and will place initial oil accordingly, but I don't know if it will work out). Japan will try to keep discipline and save 1 oil per turn, 2 if at all possible.

Once Japan has a big enough stockpile (which may never be quite big enough) the NEI oil will be used for production.

The good news is that Japan only needs oil for 7 turns: it doesn't matter if it can reorganize units at the end of July/August 1945 or not.

Production
The other dog-wagging tail of Japanese strategy, the problem with Japanese production can be summed up as: Japan has 1 resource in Japan, and 14 factories to fill with resources, and if Japan can't produce units, it can't resist the Allied onslaught for long.

Japan has 19 factories: 14 in Japan, 2 in China, 2 in Manchuria, and 1 in Korea. Japan has 14 resources: 1 in Japan, 1 in Korea, 3 in Manchuria, 3 in China, 1 in Hainan, 1 in Formosa, 1 in the Philippines, 1 in Indochina, and 2 in Malaya. Of these, 8 must be shipped overseas by convoy point to get anywhere useful. If Japan can fill its factories, it produces 20 build points, a respectable total (if modest when compared to the amounts produced by the US).

Given Japan's reliance on convoy points to ship its resources, though, that is a very big if.

The bottom line is that Japan has to defend its resource shipping lines at sea, and it has to defends its resources on land.

Units
The Japanese Army is decently sized, but not numerous enough for its many commitments. Japan has to defend its production base in mainland Asia, its overseas objective hexes, and its oil. On top of that, Japan has to defend Japan proper from invasion, and would also like to scrape together a counter-strike force to repel Allied invasions of islands.

For its part, the Imperial Navy, while outclassed and outnumbered by the US Navy, is not insurmountably so - yet - and can still pack a punch, especially in combination with land-based air. Of course, the Navy guzzles oil, so if possible its use will be sparing - any turn where the Navy doesn't have to sortie will be a win, of sorts.

Japan's land based air forces are actually almost as numerous as their opposition, at least at the start of the scenario (depending on how much the Allies build to fight Japan, this may remain the case throughout, or it might change to a lesser or greater extent). These have to be placed carefully, as their primary objective will be to protect the convoy lines and the navy.

Where Japan really falls short is its sealift and shipping: it begins this scenario with but a single AMPH (amphibious craft) and a single TRS (sea transport) unit, and with but 14 convoy points. It gets more convoy points each turn as reinforcements, but any new sealift units constructed now arrive much too late (although, perhaps not...).

This Achilles heel really constrains Japan's ability to shuttle units from Japan to the periphery, or vice-versa, or to mount a counter-attack against an Allied invasion. It also means Japan has very little slack to replace losses, and can basically forget about keeping sea lines of communication open anywhere except the two core sea areas (the China Sea and South China Sea).
~ Composer99
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: Decline & Fall AAR

Post by composer99 »

Anyway, on to look at individual fronts/sectors/sea areas.
~ Composer99
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: Decline & Fall AAR

Post by composer99 »

The Manchuria Sector

One element of (M)WiF that is usually more important in a 1939 game is the neutrality pact: Germany and the USSR, of course, begin a 1939 game with the infamous Nazi-Soviet pact.

In the "Decline & Fall" scenario, Japan and the USSR have a neutrality pact in place. This pact means that Japan can't simply declare war on the USSR, and vice-versa. Instead, the power wishing to declare war must be able to overcome the other power's defensive "garrison" in the border zone.

Treaties begin with very high levels of defensive garrison, but these levels decline over time.

The rules of the scenario specify that the Soviet-Japanese pact has been in effect since 1941, meaning that by now it won't take much for one power to get over the garrison of the other.

Of course, that power won't be Japan: it is already fighting a land war with not enough units in Asia, and doesn't need to fight another.

The USSR for its part probably can't or won't attempt to declare war straight away. Instead it will want to build its forces up so that it can achieve a rapid victory against the Japanese Army.

Here is a screen capture of the neutrality pact overview panel.

Image

(The information shown is inaccurate at the moment, as there are no units set up by either power. When I get to adding markers to the pact during play, I will share an up to date overview panel.)
Attachments
0033japan..overview.jpg
0033japan..overview.jpg (51.73 KiB) Viewed 875 times
~ Composer99
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: Decline & Fall AAR

Post by composer99 »

And here is a screen capture of the markers drawn so far. Markers and on-map units taken together constitute the defensive or offensive garrison for a pact.

(In case you are wondering, the USSR gets to add markers to its pact(s) at a much higher rate than Japan does: the USSR can draw up to one marker per turn, while Japan can draw up to one marker per two turns.)



Image
Attachments
0034 japan.. markers.jpg
0034 japan.. markers.jpg (37.89 KiB) Viewed 875 times
~ Composer99
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: Decline & Fall AAR

Post by composer99 »

Here is Japan's setup in Manchuria.

The Japanese plan is to hold the pact area - largely in the area shown - and then fall back, leaving speed bumps in mountains and cities, to a final redoubt around Port Arthur (which I have already laid the ground for - largely because, as an objective hex, Port Arthur ought to be defended).

Additional reinforcements will likely consist of short-range fighters, a land unit to take up position in Korea, and most likely up to one more land unit in Manchuria.

Image

Because of the USSR's likely focus against Germany (at least until the Ostheer shrinks some), Japan currently forecasts that war will begin in Jan/Feb 1945, for three reasons:
- first, the USSR will have spare offensive chits, which it might want to use for a super-combined impulse when starting a two-front war (so as to get more air missions)
- second, the USSR will have had a chance to build up land and air units in the area, not just enough to break the pact, but also to make quick work of the Japanese defenders
- third, the snowy weather will be good for the Red Army but sucky for Japan.
Attachments
0035japanmanchuria.jpg
0035japanmanchuria.jpg (352.39 KiB) Viewed 875 times
~ Composer99
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: Decline & Fall AAR

Post by composer99 »

The China Front

The China front is divided into three sectors: north, central, and south.

The North Sector

In the north sector, the Japanese are fighting the Communist Chinese.

The Japanese objective in this sector is to protect its resource base, allowing the resources to ship to Japan.

To that end, Japanese forces are set up to screen the Communists and to strike at them if they cross the river.

If possible, Japan will maintain a stalemate in this region for the rest of 1944.

Starting in Jan/Feb 1945, the expected USSR invasion will shortly render the north sector position untenable. Once that occurs the Japanese will fall back, with the aim of bringing its army to the ports to be shipped back to Japan or to other overseas sectors.

Here is the northern sector set up.



Image
Attachments
0036japan..nanorth.jpg
0036japan..nanorth.jpg (416.08 KiB) Viewed 875 times
~ Composer99
User avatar
composer99
Posts: 2931
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Contact:

RE: Decline & Fall AAR

Post by composer99 »

The China Front

The China front is divided into three sectors: north, central, and south.

The Central Sector

In the central sector, the Japanese are fighting the Nationalist Chinese.

In this sector, the Japanese objective is simple: slow down a Nationalist advance on Shanghai for as long as possible, and, when the Nationalists do reach the city, hold on to it for as long as possible.

If by some mischance the Nationalists take the city, if Japan has the sealift it will attempt an immediate counter-attack to recapture it.

Here is a screenshot of the centre.





Image
Attachments
0037 japan..a centre.jpg
0037 japan..a centre.jpg (405.91 KiB) Viewed 875 times
~ Composer99
Post Reply

Return to “World in Flames”