Question for Those Who Play Japan (Lokasenna welcome now)

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: CT Grognard

The same holds for Japanese raids on Allied bases with HI.

Imagine a surprise invasion of a relatively undefended Los Angeles. 2000 oil centres, 2500 refinery, and 860 HI - that's a lot of Allied production capacity seriously hurt. It will probably be worth triggering CONUS reinforcements!

I have to try this [:D]

That or Seattle, but I'd say less troops would likely be close to LA, and you could land at a lightly defended nearby base and get LBA CAP up quickly. The key would be to find out where CONUS reinforcements arrived.

[CT Grognard]

CONUS reinforcements mostly appear at Salt Lake City.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: CT Grognard

The same holds for Japanese raids on Allied bases with HI.

Imagine a surprise invasion of a relatively undefended Los Angeles. 2000 oil centres, 2500 refinery, and 860 HI - that's a lot of Allied production capacity seriously hurt. It will probably be worth triggering CONUS reinforcements!

I have to try this [:D]

probably not worth any Allied reinforcements because the Allied player doesn't need the oil, refinery nor HI. So you gain a lot for having something reduced that you don't need.

[CT Grognard]

Right - so what you do is right at the start you land simultaneously at Port Hueneme (blocking reinforcements from San Luis Obispo), Santa Ana (blocking reinforcements from San Diego) and Los Angeles (which has 0 AV at the start), under cover of KB support.

You could use some of the magic TFs on the first turn...

[CT Grognard]

Au contraire. It is potentially a massive amount of supply and fuel the Allied player will lose out on.

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: CT Grognard

Au contraire. It is potentially a massive amount of supply and fuel the Allied player will lose out on.

Also there are airframe factories there, no? Quite a few! Those might hurt a bit too. If you also get to SD then you find more of those.

[CT Grognard]

The Allies start with refinery capacity totalling production of 47025 fuel points per day.

The usual Japanese conquest removes 20430 of these, leaving the Allied player with 26685 daily production.

Of this, Los Angeles constitutes 22500 daily production. The Allied player will be seriously hurt in the fuel stakes.

Also damaged refineries (once LA is inevitably recaptured) will cost a LOT of supply.

I am going to work on a concept for a surprise very early raid on Los Angeles, seeking to also take as much fuel onboard ships in the invading TFs, then evacuate the troops leaving nominal resistance, all under KB cover.

I reckon the ensuing damage might be debilitating.

[CT Grognard]

Hehehehe: "Captured Aircraft Factories convert to Vehicle Factories."

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: CT Grognard

Hehehehe: "Captured Aircraft Factories convert to Vehicle Factories."

I thought I'd remembered something like that. [:)]

So the loss of LA would be a disaster for the Allied cause, even if it was in Japanese hands for a day.

You'd need a LOT of divisions though. It would not be easy. I suggested this to John III after he wrecked one opponent in an RA game, and it could have worked there for sure. It would be dicey in a Scen 1 game to get so many troops so far safely and still get phase 1 targets accomplished.

[Alfred]

You should read the various posts I have made over the years of what Japan can do on the West Coast.[:)]

Returning back to what is being canvassed in this particular thread, Japan attempting a mirror action, whilst still a significant threat, would not be as dangerous as what is being proposed for the Allies in mid 1942.  But there is an absolute caveat that must be clearly declared.

It is totally unacceptable for Japan to elect a non historical start and then use the magical "*" TF to implement such a plan against the West Coast.  No JFB excuse for its use is acceptable.  It is impossible to justify its use under any circumstances.

Why do I hold such a strong view?

1.  The magical "*" TF are in the game for only one reason.  They are needed to achieve the historical dispositions on 7 December 1941.  Without them there would be no Pearl Harbor, no Malay peninsula landings, no Batan Island landing on 7 December 1941.  Without them sale of the game would be severely curtailed.

2.  "Historical" or "non Historical" starts are only switches which do not create the magical TFs.  They are "hard coded", so the magical TFs cannot be switched off.  JFB who elect a non historical start and use the magical TF on targets which simply could not have been reached on 7 December 1941 by the KB after setting sail from its northern anchorage on 26 November 1941, are already exploiting the game engine in a manner which simply has no plausible historical Allied reaction.

3.  Doing so destroys the game ab initio.  Period.  It is not a game where a fully unrestrained Japan, exploiting the game engine, uniquely with an amphibious bonus and already blessed with full control over its production which is denied to the Allies, steps into the boxing ring against an Allied opponent who has both hands tied behind his back, is blindfolded, tied to a stake and the Marquis of Queensberry rules not applied.


On the other hand, commencing the travel towards the West Coast on 7 December 1941 using normal transit times, consuming fuel at standard rates and from the historical locations where Japanese forces were located, is another matter entirely.  Then the Allied player has no excuse to not have moved forces to cover his vulnerable ports.  If he is then caught out of position, well it is exactly the same thing I said re JFBs complaints should Bullwinkle pursue this course of action in mid 1942.

The reasons why a mirror Japanese approach is not as bad are as follows.

1.  There are far fewer West Coast ports than there are Japanese Home Island ports.

2.  The length of the West Coast is much greater than the Japanese coastline.

The net effect of points 1 and 2 is that it is easier to determine where are the targeted landings and therefore easier to assemble adequate garrisons. 

3.  Much of the American and Canadian industrial facilities are inland and much further away from the coast than are the relatively few inland Japanese bases.

4.  On 7 December 1941, there already exists enough assets on the West Coast to cope with such a move, provided they are properly positioned.

5.  A Japanese failure in January 1942 will have disastrous short term, let alone long term, consequences for their capacity to prosecute the war.  OTOH, Bullwinkle failing in mid 1942 will not worsen the Allied position.


I always say that there is always a counter to every plan. Except when using the magical "*" TF to just appear off Los Angeles on 7 December 1941, to which there is no Allied counter, I don't have problems with being creative if it remains within historical plausibility.  Exploiting an opponent's oversights or downright bad play is to be encouraged.  Players who rush everything forward to create mega stacks, deserve to have the deficiencies of their RTS style of play demonstrated.

Alfred

Edit: 6. The emergency American reinforcements resulting from crossing the LOD are far, far superior to what Japan gets in the mirror.

[obvert]

Not even considering using magic TFs. It wouldn't really be feasible anyway at that point. Not enough troops in good positions to be utilized that way.

I've read a few things you wrote about bombing the West Coast bases from the time of the Panzerjaeger Hortland/Canoerebel game. There are some options, but as you say, they come at a great price. For the Allies losing a division here or there of more easily replaceable US troops isn't going to break the bank. Losing the ships won't cripple future invasion prospects. However, there are also drawbacks.

Japanese players may choose to align their production in a number of ways. You may not know what factories you're going to try to trash other than HI/LI. Plus, the more easily accessible to Allied threats are not the most industrially developed. The most damaging strike would most likely be the oil at Shikuka or the industry at Sapporo.

As for aircraft factories, Hachinohe and Sendai have one each (and for me in my last game they were both R n D factories), but Utsonomiya I think is the only semi-accessible location with more, and it's VERY close to Tokyo. Not something I'd think would be the best option. Akita also has oil, but moving through Hakodate's fort would not be advisable.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: CT Grognard

Au contraire. It is potentially a massive amount of supply and fuel the Allied player will lose out on.

Also there are airframe factories there, no? Quite a few! Those might hurt a bit too. If you also get to SD then you find more of those.

that's true, if you take a base with aircraft factories, these are gone for good, forever. But that seems a tad gamey to me, because why wouldn't the US not being able to build these factories somewhere else on
the continent. And without these factories it's kind of a gamebreaker for the Japanese too as there will be not much going on later in the war.

[Jorge_Stanbury]

Question:
Don't you think that succesfully executing "the chevy" will reduce the chances of a successful "cadillac" ?
- you will certainly alert Lokasenna that he need to cover his important bases
- the additional divisions will give him more room to proper garrison the HI

regards

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

Any deep moves into "Injun" country always need luck to fully come off.  But even an aborted move can reap considerable benefit as it sows into the opponent's mind a new set of conditions they have to guard against.  I always point out that the secret to successfully out manoeuvring an opponent is to increase the number of options they have.  Particularly when those options involve defensive postures.  Any Japanese assets located on the Home Islands are defensive and can be kept there in 1942 by adept Allied play using much fewer assets.  IOW, a great Allied force multiplier.

I haven't bothered to open up the scenario from the Japanese position but have instead relied on the 2010 planning maps.  There I count on 7 December 1941 many weakly held bases directly approachable from the sea.

Kyushu

3 bases with zero AV
2 bases with 8 AV

Shikoku

2 bases with zero AV
1 base with 9 AV

Honshu

9 bases with zero AV
3 bases with 8 AV
2 bases with 9 AV

Hokkaido

3 bases with zero AV

All these bases have industry and all are on the coast.

I commented on three industry types because they automatically suffer considerable damage upon capture independent of the presence of engineers.  An important consideration if adopting the Chevy version.  However, the Cadillac version allows for Yankee engineers to volunteer their services.  Their enthusiasm in the endeavour could see substantial damage caused to Home Island oil/refinery/resource centres and aircraft/engine/armament/vehicle factories plus shipyards, when they capture the facilities.  Can you imagine the consternation on the enemy if their Home Island rail traffic of oil to refineries is reduced?  Why it would make those overseas oil deposits more valuable and require sealift back to mama through seas saturated with hungry Allied subs.

There are therefore many potential targets.  About 25 potential target locations.  Of course some of these targets may have received reinforcements but ...[:)]
With the Allies having 3 SST, three simultaneous Chevy landings can be made.  Simultaneously several Cadillac operations could be mounted, remembering that each xAP would be combat loaded to unload fully on D Day and thus will not be carrying a complete Allied LCU.  You don't need a regt worth of AV to capture a base with a zero AV enemy garrison.

Travel silently; use waypoints to disguise radio identification of destination; send swarms of insects to multiple destinations.  Push forward if ID'd, even if he guesses correctly the destinations, the enemy can't swot all the insects before they arrive.  Or redirect some ID'd xAPs to other destinations; after all the LCUs are not going to be prepped for the landings so they can easily be sent to a new destination.  Ah, decisions and more decisions for the enemy.[:)]

Alfred

All good thoughts.

But. [:)]

When I said I looked at four I meant I looked at four with aircraft factories. That to me is the real trade-up for the Cadillac. I looked at many bases through the archived Intel reports and Lokasenna is no dummy. He has units, most with AV, on pretty much everything I'd want. Sapporo, for example, has an Army HQ and a full, very good division. The approach to Sapporo is the easiest, but he's got it covered.

Bases with substantial HI or LI are covered. (We're in the last week of May.) I don't know fort levels, but I figure with LCU reaction times from nearby plus the large amount of LBA he can get on my landing in no more than two days I can't expect to take down much beyond a base force before my landing force is mush. An SST can carry about 70 shooters. A fast xAP can carry a regiment, but it can't unload one in a day. And I don't have hot & cold running unrestricted regiments right now. I have a big investment in the Aleutians, Canton, and a few other places I hope to build from later.

Two of my SSTs are in the deep DEI/SoPac re-taking dot bases and causing reactions. Re-positioning them to pick up and then hit an HI target would be 5-6 weeks.

As far as the approach, I'm not as sanguine as you that very many vectors have a shot. My subs have seen the patrols on the western side of the south side of the HI. Coming anywhere near the Jimas, the Pescadores, etc. would be fatal and a waste. The only way to land I see is the SE flank of Honshu and Hokkaido. Even those I know have quite a few Kates on ASW which could easily shift to naval attack.

So, I have a target in mind. It's a trade-off, and it's one target. I would say the chances of landing at all on the western side is 15-20%. On the SE flank 50% at most. I have to keep the ROI in mind. I don't have a lot of soldiers to ask "volunteer" right now. And I think a lot of what I want to do is accomplished by the Chevy as well, which can go off at Para Jima by SST.

I'm moving assets, so I have time. But as tasty as the results would be if a multiple-landing op worked, I think the odds of it getting to shore are poor, no matter the degree of way-pointing and flank speed dashes. If I had tried this on Feb 1 I think it might have been a different set of variables.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: CT Grognard

Au contraire. It is potentially a massive amount of supply and fuel the Allied player will lose out on.

It wouldn't matter much and not even close to the value of the ER packages, especially the fighter dump into the pools.

EC generates 40,000 fuel organically, and Japan can't touch it. It just appears. SD has over a quarter-million on 12/7. LA has, I think, over 600,000. SF has about 200,000. Seattle has about 150,000ish I think. PH has about another quarter-million. Even CT generates 250/day forever and for free.

Unlike Japan, CONUS never has too little supply to repair anything. It would take the time, yes. 2000 Oil at LA to 1000, reduced to 500 on the re-take is 150 days back to 2000. The supply is not a factor.

Taking aircraft factories would hurt more, but they're distributed. And the Allies would still get the initial units. They'd only lose the replacements. A lot of the factories near Seattle are late-war planes. Elsewhere they're mostly 2E bombers.

On the flip side, the main invasion sites have huge minefields on 12/7. The fighters are old, but numerous, and the KB would be needed and it would have to hang around, pinned between an intact PH and a continental land-mass. (Also, a nice CV starts in San Diego.) Taking a base like Port Huneme gives you a crap port to try to shove an invasion's worth of supply through, under attack. The US Army has some real tank units in white restricted on the WC, and railroads to move them. They'd chew up IJA infantry like cottage cheese once in action.

Alfred's long-ago posts on a bombing campaign against SeaTac from the Canadian islands could work enough to cost some factory capacity and get some strat VPs. Trying to barge ashore on the main WC with maneuver units? Japan loses the game that day.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

Question:
Don't you think that succesfully executing "the chevy" will reduce the chances of a successful "cadillac" ?
- you will certainly alert Lokasenna that he need to cover his important bases
- the additional divisions will give him more room to proper garrison the HI

regards

I see either 'C' as a one-time shot. A player as good as Lokasenna will not be caught out twice. Very possibly not even once.

Garrisons in the HI only matter if you intend to invade there. I hope it doesn't come to that. Or if it does the invaders will be speaking Russian.

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: CT Grognard

Au contraire. It is potentially a massive amount of supply and fuel the Allied player will lose out on.

Unlike Japan, CONUS never has too little supply to repair anything. It would take the time, yes. 2000 Oil at LA to 1000, reduced to 500 on the re-take is 150 days back to 2000. The supply is not a factor.

Isn't it impossible to repair these for the Allies? So you'd be stuck at 500, at best, plus whatever the refineries ended up at and without the AC factories. It would be a big blow. Likely never to happen, but much more than the Allies can do against Japan proper with a 'volunteer' landing as the only targets with those kinds of facilities are well protected.

[CT Grognard]

I believe the Allies can repair, but only 1 point per day at a cost of 1,000 supply.

Let's say you damage oil, refinery capacity and HI in Los Angeles by 75%. That is 1500 oil, 1875 refinery and 615 HI to repair. That would cost almost 4 million in foregone supply to repair!

[Encircled]

The allies have that sitting in SF by the start of '43

The risks far outweigh the gains

[obvert]

ORIGINAL: Encircled

The allies have that sitting in SF by the start of '43

The risks far outweigh the gains

Hard to say. No one's ever done it!

This would have to be done well before 43, and i it was, those number would not be in SF at 1/43.[:)]

Just intriguing, and a possibility the Allies should prepare for instead of sending out everything they can buy, or possibly instead of upgrading all planes elsewhere and leaving the dregs for the WC. Just like Japan in the war keeping many of it's best at home, or close to home in Manchuria and China, the US took very seriously the defense of the West Coast. Why is it so much more risky than going for India or OZ, with all of the associated economic and tactical concerns involved in those moves?

Come to think of it, has anyone ever landed on the HI early, as Bullwinkle is contemplating?