Turnaround? Lowpe (J) vs Tiemanj (A) Stock

[Lowpe]

Georges in action! Do great, but then there are Jugs sweeps. Still do okay for all the lousy Allied sweeps here, and in Rabaul.

Thank you George!

[Lowpe]

Thanks to George, losses aren't unreasonable. All fighting done over Japanese bases, while Allied pilots gotta be KIA or MIA or POW.

[Lowpe]

No massive carrier plane strike at Rabaul...deathstar clearly visible here at Wake.

[Lowpe]

Burma, the meat grinder...

[Lowpe]

Nasty artilery bombardments...moving the tanks and other stuff to reserve. RTA Divison misses getting southeast and suffers a nasty shock attack. 1 mile short of getting away.

[Lowpe]

Caught in the plains!

Another group west of Chungking is caught this day, will they still be there tomorrow?

[Lowpe]

On the bad news front, an IJN Destroyer in an ASW hunter killer group eats a torpedo and sinks.[:(]

The E burns up at Trinkat...not unexpected.

Almost October, and here I am! Who would have thought it! Banzai![:D]

[ny59giants]

What do you have at Pegu?? If I was Allies, I would have some troops prepped for this base to land and cause you considerable headaches in Burma. [:D]

[njp72]

As stated before I think you have done a great job since the hand over but with the Allies being so far forward in Burma late 43 is a real issue.

A seaborne flanking manoeuvre on somewhere on the Malaysian coast would no doubt cause issues.

Usually when the Burma front collapses it occurs suddenly and the results are catastrophic.

Allied units move so quickly and their firepower is so strong, stopping them in anything but heavy vegetation and mountains is very difficult.

Good luck.

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

What do you have at Pegu?? If I was Allies, I would have some troops prepped for this base to land and cause you considerable headaches in Burma. [:D]

How many paratroops does he have left now? I destroyed one Chindit, have the 2nd Chindit trapped on Trinkat along with two other paratoop units.

Anyhow, I see the Allies doing recon every turn on Pegu, waiting for a chance, there and Moulmein.

He has had bad luck with paradrops in the Burma theater so far...

Oh, forgot to mention that Obvert's holding action here is the real plan -- I just hope I don't get flanked from the sea like he did. I am moving much stuff back, planning second and third lines.

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

What do you have at Pegu?? If I was Allies, I would have some troops prepped for this base to land and cause you considerable headaches in Burma. [:D]

There is about 500 AV there, lots of good AA, and the 2nd Tank Division is heading there right now, in case it is needed against the 4th Marines or it might head to Raheng.

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: njp72

As stated before I think you have done a great job since the hand over but with the Allies being so far forward in Burma late 43 is a real issue.

A seaborne flanking manoeuvre on somewhere on the Malaysian coast would no doubt cause issues.

Usually when the Burma front collapses it occurs suddenly and the results are catastrophic.

Allied units move so quickly and their firepower is so strong, stopping them in anything but heavy vegetation and mountains is very difficult.

Good luck.

That invasion is the first thing I look for each turn. Don't think it will happen yet, for a while. Deathstar is at Wake, I have sunk over 50 xaps, and 10 AP & AMC. (off the top of my head).

Not discounting it, but it would be bloody as I have most of my BB strength here, while his is at Wake or on the bottom.

No, Allies will grind it out in the Jungle for a while yet. I think.

[Lowpe]

Most of my traps from yesterday didn't work, laying a few more, especially one at Mergui.

Worried a little bit about Fletchers raiding Rabaul, sent some CA we will see what happens...

The dirt road east of Tuang Gyi worries me, can't keep the troops in the jungle supplied. Allies have to have the same problem, Tuang Gyi can only draw 1000...will see if he keeps up the bombardments there or not.

Four BBs enroute to hit the Allied paratroopers at Trinkat. Plus the super heavies in reserve.

[Lowpe]

The next day:

Allied night bombing at Rabaul.

Supply gets to Burma...

Horde of individual Pt boats at Port Blair. I need to notify the Allies this is gamey, but what is the minimum size of a pt boat task force? Groups of 3? 5? 7? 10?

[ny59giants]

Some players have HR that the number of PT boat TFs at a base depends on the port size. Size 0 to 3 allows 1 TF; 4 to 6 allows 2 TF; 7 or larger allows 3 TF. No more than 12 PT boast per TF.

As an Allied player, the most I have had has been two TFs with 12 PTs each.

[Lowpe]

Allies response to adding Giants HR....which I simply cut and paste: (thanks NYGiants![&o])

My main reason for using them in this manner is as scouts for larger TFs (raise the DL of your incoming bombardment group)... I considered the ops points and ammo drain as bonuses. I'm not sure how much ammo your are losing on them - especially the PT TFs as they seem to run if you point at them from on deck. They never even shot at your AMc a turn or 2 ago, and that was the only reason I sent them. I don't recall any time where you were unable to withdraw outside of air range because of running into a PT TF (unless it happens this turn). I haven't ever used xAKLs or an xXX ships as pickets - though I have occasionally tried to ram supplies into high risk areas using a single one.

Because I use them as scouts - which would mean I would need to place them along an expected axis of approach to be of any use, I don't really like the proposed HR as written. And I need PTs the most at small bases. I did some research a while back to see how they were used historically, and early in the Solomon's campaign (when numbers were few) they were used in small numbers as scouts (where I got the idea for it in the first place).

That said, I don't have an issue limiting their use in some manner. I suppose what I set up at Port Blair this past turn could be considered gamey. Can I propose

The number of PT boats at a base shall be no more than [12] at size 0 - 3, [24] at 4 - 6, [36] at 7+. and a PT TF shall be no fewer than 2 boats (unless one is sunk or there is only 1 PT based at a port). No more than 1 PT TF / hex for an ocean hex, 2 PT TF / hex for a base hex.

Let me know what you think... and change the numbers around if you think they are too big (or small).[/b]

Unfortunately, it slows the pace of the game down...so I simply said no single ship PT/MTB boats where possible and lets keep playing and we can keep discussing it.

I got burned in the Marshalls once by this tactic, and simply haven't tried anything against it since. His proposed rule of size 2 task forces won't change anything, they will make any base bombardment proof but I guess I would rather play than negotiate.

But the Allies do like single ship task forces.

[obvert]

Can you not put some single ship MTB TFs in your bases near his PT scouts so he can be equally frustrated if he tries to bombard, land or do anything in that area?

I found that as Japan if I used fast E or old DD in 70% or greater moonlight I would be very successful against the PTs. In one ship TFs maybe you can clear them out easily with some of those kinds of runs with no reaction set so they don't go chasing all over and get left out of LR CAP in the day. You can also try Oscars or other fighter at 100ft.

I don't like how the game treats single ships, and I would not use single PTs regularly. I've occasionally had one if that was all that was in the pool when i tried to build them. I prefer TFs of 4-6 boats. I think this is similar to how they were used most of the time in the war. More than that I think as an Allied commander now this give me the best shot to get a hit on something. I just a few turns back sank a DD with one TT hit from a four PT boat TF.

I'd say to him scouts are fine but just have a standard low limit for numbers of PTs in a TF since the game does allow each and every one to interact with your TFs as they run in, and that is not exactly how it would have worked in reality. Having ten combats instead of two will definitely put you at a disadvantage and he has nothing to lose using 1 VP boats like that, while you have much more limited ship and MTB boat numbers to combat this tactic.

[Lowpe]

Thanks for the advice Obvert.[&o]

I don't have any small pt craft[X(]...and Japan's aren't nearly as agile at PT boats, which means they sink super fast. I think I had 10 engagements on a lone PT boat back duirng the Java campaign before I finally sank it. That is a lot of supply, fuel for 1 VP.

I have tried Fighters, Fighter bombers, divebombers, medium bombers, torpedo bombers all on hitting the PT boats but nothing ever flies no matter the altitude. They will fly and attack a group of them. Naval search routinely hits them (every turn) but nothing is ever really hit.

I have had success to with the smallish ships, even DMS back in 42, but often times they encounter them and don't fight at all, but they always fight against shore bombardments. Will just have to try new things, perhaps my planes will target them in groups of two. Perhaps very narrow, low flying naval search much like as against submarines?

Just need to adapt and overcome.[:)]

[Lowpe]

The weakness of PT boats, other than daylight and range, is fuel. But I think they can sit out there a few hexes from a port with remain on station indefinitely.

Will have to put my thinking cap on.

[Lowpe]

I just received a much more conciliatory email from the Allies...., however, he is keen about anything that says his game play is gamey as that is the rationale behind the first Japan quitting. Well, it is a game.

I certainly have used my assets in a gamey manner --- Petes flying night CAP for example. But, in truth it is usually to counter some other odd/not modelled well tactic the Allies were using.

I sorta believe that there is a counter to every tactic just need to find them.