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

[Lowpe]

The defenders of Nagoya. Two depot divisions make it today. Here is the plan, break down all division but 1. That lucky division will get nailed by the 7 BB, 8CA, plus 60 other smaller ships.

The next day they will fragment, and another division will rebuild and take it on the chin.

I hope this protects all the fragments and rgts and brigades.

Also, today 4 more tank regiments have arrived. Every day without an attack and my command prep gets better.

[Lowpe]

A good day in the air. A very rare positive victory point day.

I had a good attack against some Fletchers with a squadron of Myojo...they all miss in the morning, and their A6M5c escorts take it on chin but get all the bombers thru.

Then the Myojos decide to fly in the afternoon too. The Mustangs have a field day on them. Sigh.[:(]

[Lowpe]

August 4th, 1944

Nagoya bombarded and then aerially bombed and then artillery bombarded. 7000AV on the Allies, up to 3800 for the Empire.

MTBs continue to earn their points...

[Lowpe]

Two decent battles for Japan in the jungle. Won't last as supplies are being dwindled...

Allies moving on closing down the pocket before moving into China proper I think.

[Lowpe]

Tiemanj is tied up and mentioned slower turns for a while...

I have 3800 AV in Nagoya, with almost every spare Tank regiment there. They seem to really be able to avoid the naval bombardments and do pretty well against aerial bombing too.

I am now starting my daily routine of having one large division take the brunt of the naval bombardments every three days and building up other splintered division for the other days and cycling them thru.

I need to add up the amount of infantry I now have on Reserves, I believe it is around 800. I have one crack division with 80+ experience I will leave broken down and in reserve mode.

I am moving more CD gun units here, and will move them in and out of Nagoya in the hopes of inflicting some wear and tear and the Allied bombardment ships.

I am expecting a full out bombing of Nagoya followed by a shock attack this turn. Cross your fingers.

[Crackaces]

I am moving more CD gun units here, and will move them in and out of Nagoya in the hopes of inflicting some wear and tear and the Allied bombardment ships

I might propose that If the Allies are ignoring bombardment distances and just coming in close the CD guns might take their toll
But .. if those CD guns start firing and in particular I think they will fire during bombardment artillery attacks and consume big amounts of supply
others might comment ...

[PaxMondo]

Supply consumption is based upon LC ... so depends upon the size of the CD guns ... not too many of them are mobile, and those that are don't have that big of guns nor that many.

Good news for your ID is that CD's are bombardment magnets, so they will bear the brunt of the bombardment....

[Lowpe]

Aug 5th, 1944

Allies keep making good progress in Vietnam pushing from the north, south, and west.

No heavy aerial bombing on Nagoya (but normal naval bombardment by 75 ships), Allies pick other targets and hit the runways north of Osaka and Keijo![X(] Will the vehicle factory at Keijo be next, that will cripple Japanese morale as those 5 type 3 tanks a day are really making a difference and to see them all go by the wayside for the rest of the game will be a bitter pill.

[Lowpe]

Notice the blue waterside hexes that prevent Allied movement and expansion. They are pretty tactical.

Matsuyama is free of the Allied attacker.[:)] For now.[:D]

[Alfred]

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Supply consumption is based upon LC ... so depends upon the size of the CD guns ... not too many of them are mobile, and those that are don't have that big of guns nor that many.

Good news for your ID is that CD's are bombardment magnets, so they will bear the brunt of the bombardment....

Not for guns in a LCU.

Every device in a LCU consumes 1 supply point per month. That amount changes if combat is involved and the number of shots the unit takes. Each shot adds 10% to supply consumption and the maximum is 10 shots, which amounts to doubling the supply consumption.

For LCUs, there is no internal tracking of device ammo levels or supply consumption. The tracking is only at the LCU level.

Naval guns on ships have a different supply consumption algorithm to naval guns in a LCU.

Alfred

[Drakanel]

I really hope you manage to keep Nagoya for as long as possible. Banzai!

Now the real problem would be if he were to land somewhere else...

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Supply consumption is based upon LC ... so depends upon the size of the CD guns ... not too many of them are mobile, and those that are don't have that big of guns nor that many.

Good news for your ID is that CD's are bombardment magnets, so they will bear the brunt of the bombardment....

Not for guns in a LCU.

Every device in a LCU consumes 1 supply point per month. That amount changes if combat is involved and the number of shots the unit takes. Each shot adds 10% to supply consumption and the maximum is 10 shots, which amounts to doubling the supply consumption.

For LCUs, there is no internal tracking of device ammo levels or supply consumption. The tracking is only at the LCU level.

Naval guns on ships have a different supply consumption algorithm to naval guns in a LCU.

Alfred

Alfred, I don't think you mentioned this supply expenditure in your Supply Opus. Very good to know.

I assume supply points spent by engineers building forts is above the general lcu supply costs and is not subject to doubling if attacked enough times.

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: Drakanel

I really hope you manage to keep Nagoya for as long as possible. Banzai!

Now the real problem would be if he were to land somewhere else...

You and me both. He will land somewhere else....at least he should.

[Crackaces]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Supply consumption is based upon LC ... so depends upon the size of the CD guns ... not too many of them are mobile, and those that are don't have that big of guns nor that many.

Good news for your ID is that CD's are bombardment magnets, so they will bear the brunt of the bombardment....

Not for guns in a LCU.

Every device in a LCU consumes 1 supply point per month. That amount changes if combat is involved and the number of shots the unit takes. Each shot adds 10% to supply consumption and the maximum is 10 shots, which amounts to doubling the supply consumption.

For LCUs, there is no internal tracking of device ammo levels or supply consumption. The tracking is only at the LCU level.

Naval guns on ships have a different supply consumption algorithm to naval guns in a LCU.

Alfred

This is a damn interesting problem .. so the smaller guns that take more shots use up more supply ? So bombarding at a range the encourages the smaller guns at thir maximum range seems in my line of thinking to burn up the enemies supplies at the lowest risk?
That also suggests to me that constant flows of bombardment that day after day get the maximum shots and constant disruption is better than a big bombardment with rest in between ..

[Alfred]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Supply consumption is based upon LC ... so depends upon the size of the CD guns ... not too many of them are mobile, and those that are don't have that big of guns nor that many.

Good news for your ID is that CD's are bombardment magnets, so they will bear the brunt of the bombardment....

Not for guns in a LCU.

Every device in a LCU consumes 1 supply point per month. That amount changes if combat is involved and the number of shots the unit takes. Each shot adds 10% to supply consumption and the maximum is 10 shots, which amounts to doubling the supply consumption.

For LCUs, there is no internal tracking of device ammo levels or supply consumption. The tracking is only at the LCU level.

Naval guns on ships have a different supply consumption algorithm to naval guns in a LCU.

Alfred

Alfred, I don't think you mentioned this supply expenditure in your Supply Opus. Very good to know.

I assume supply points spent by engineers building forts is above the general lcu supply costs and is not subject to doubling if attacked enough times.

I have covered it in much more detail in other posts. See this early 2015 thread which has probably escaped your attention.

tm.asp?m=3778277&mpage=1&key=supply&#3778578

As always one needs to read all my posts in a thread and click on any supplied linked threads.

The basic position is quite simple.

1. Supply consumption for ground units involved in combat is tracked at the LCU level.

2. Supply consumption from combat is not tracked internally for each individual device within the LCU.

3. The amount of additional supply brought about by combat applies to the entire LCU and not to individual devices within the LCU. This LCU tracking level is determined on the basis of shots involving the LCU, not on the basis of participation of individual devices.

4. An LCU with a nominal supply consumption of 1500 will go to 1650 after a single attack by the enemy with no return fire. I have detailed this in post #6840 in this this AAR.

5. Engineer expenditure on non combat tasks is added to the nominal supply estimate.

Alfred

[Alfred]

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Supply consumption is based upon LC ... so depends upon the size of the CD guns ... not too many of them are mobile, and those that are don't have that big of guns nor that many.

Good news for your ID is that CD's are bombardment magnets, so they will bear the brunt of the bombardment....

Not for guns in a LCU.

Every device in a LCU consumes 1 supply point per month. That amount changes if combat is involved and the number of shots the unit takes. Each shot adds 10% to supply consumption and the maximum is 10 shots, which amounts to doubling the supply consumption.

For LCUs, there is no internal tracking of device ammo levels or supply consumption. The tracking is only at the LCU level.

Naval guns on ships have a different supply consumption algorithm to naval guns in a LCU.

Alfred

This is a damn interesting problem .. so the smaller guns that take more shots use up more supply ? So bombarding at a range the encourages the smaller guns at thir maximum range seems in my line of thinking to burn up the enemies supplies at the lowest risk?
That also suggests to me that constant flows of bombardment that day after day get the maximum shots and constant disruption is better than a big bombardment with rest in between ..

No.[:)]

See the preceding post of mine.

Individual devices within the LCU do not track their supply consumption as such. It is the unit itself which tracks supply irrespective of which devices within it directly participated in combat or how "often" they did. The number of times the devices participate gets credited to the unit's "shots".

Personally I don't think the term "shots" is the best term but it is what the devs employed. Better would be something along the lines of "participation rounds" involving the LCU.

It isn't that smaller guns firing more often use up more supply. Each participation round involving the smaller guns ups by 10% the estimated supply consumption of the entire LCU by 10%. A participation round which sees no involvement by the smaller guns still sees the LCU increase its estimated supply consumption by 10%.

So whilst not technically correct regarding the mechanics of the smaller guns, the conclusion of regular bombardments rather than a single nuclear bombardment would generally be correct. I say generally because the nuclear bombardment might result in greater damage to devices in term of readiness, disruptions, fatigue etc which all have their own supply consumption needs to make right.

Alfred

[Crackaces]

Ok the concept of "participation rounds" (vs. "shots") really clarified the point for me. Thanks Alfred!

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

I have covered it in much more detail in other posts. See this early 2015 thread which has probably escaped your attention.

tm.asp?m=3778277&mpage=1&key=supply�

As always one needs to read all my posts in a thread and click on any supplied linked threads.

The basic position is quite simple.

1. Supply consumption for ground units involved in combat is tracked at the LCU level.

2. Supply consumption from combat is not tracked internally for each individual device within the LCU.

3. The amount of additional supply brought about by combat applies to the entire LCU and not to individual devices within the LCU. This LCU tracking level is determined on the basis of shots involving the LCU, not on the basis of participation of individual devices.

4. An LCU with a nominal supply consumption of 1500 will go to 1650 after a single attack by the enemy with no return fire. I have detailed this in post #6840 in this this AAR.

5. Engineer expenditure on non combat tasks is added to the nominal supply estimate.

Alfred

Thanks so much for the link; I did indeed missed seeing it for whatever reason.[:)]

I also enjoyed reading the Strafing linked article too. [:)]

[Lowpe]

Aug7 1944

Shanghai gets rough treatment...Yank Carriers heading for Yellow Sea and my remaining battleships?

Allies sweep a base in Korea, I had been using it for LRCAP over the vehicle factory at Keijo and some LRCAP fighters bleed over...never a good result.

[Lowpe]

Losses in the air today.