The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

[Cap Mandrake]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

I have been able to rearm Yamato in early May 1942 with Japanese AKE's (which are less capable than most USN versions) in a port too small to even allow the AKE's to dock . With Yamato and the 16 in guns of modern USN BB's you can usually only rearm one magazine at a time, even with multiple AKE's.


Be aware that refuleing also eats up op points and there is a test based on the size of the BB and the size of the AKE. Below a certain size, a smaller AKE cannot rearm the biggest BB's. Also, the AKE's expend op points so there is a limit to how much work they can do in one day. Lastly, they need to be loaded with supply points using the "load tender" button. Put the AKE's in a SUPPORT TF and set to DO NOT UNLOAD.

Not supposed to work I believe.

Yes, I was surprised too.

DBB

Level 3 port with 18 naval support

5 x AKE (3000 x 1, 3700 x 4) in a support convoy

I can confirm Yamato will rearm 1 magazine at a time, expending about 650 of her own op points per day

Maybe it is a DBB thing?

[BillBrown]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I took it as an observation.

You're right about the level of detail. I sent a turn to John last night. It took me three hours. That included about 45 minutes to an hour resetting Death Star and the Herd to follow a new ASW TF (forced on me by the AI, as I explained earlier) and then checking each TF twice to make sure the orders were correct. That process was such an agonizing click-fest that I couldn't go through the carrier TFs to reset all the aircraft squadrons from range 4 to range 5 in order to strike shipping at Tarakan. I should have, but that would've taken at least another hour and perhaps considerably more.

I can easily spend four to six hours on turns now. Not uber complicated turns, but regular turns. (I can sometimes flip in as little as 50 minutes to an hour, but those instances are increasingly rare.)

I'm having a blast, though. Part of it is because I love the planning and the unfolding of the plan. To wit: It's been tremendously gratifying to set out, from day one of this game, to weaken the Japanese navy to the point that John couldn't use it. I'm not quite there, but gracious! He hasn't felt able to commit a combat TF to the DEI in months...and only a single one to the Philippines. To play this deeply into the game so that very, very long-term plans are finally playing out is an amazingly fulfilling experience.

This is why I decided to not take on a third game. I have one in April 1943 and I see my time spent per trun going up at a fast rate. I realized that I was not going to have time to do three games at one time.

[dave sindel]

ORIGINAL: BillBrown

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I took it as an observation.

You're right about the level of detail. I sent a turn to John last night. It took me three hours. That included about 45 minutes to an hour resetting Death Star and the Herd to follow a new ASW TF (forced on me by the AI, as I explained earlier) and then checking each TF twice to make sure the orders were correct. That process was such an agonizing click-fest that I couldn't go through the carrier TFs to reset all the aircraft squadrons from range 4 to range 5 in order to strike shipping at Tarakan. I should have, but that would've taken at least another hour and perhaps considerably more.

I can easily spend four to six hours on turns now. Not uber complicated turns, but regular turns. (I can sometimes flip in as little as 50 minutes to an hour, but those instances are increasingly rare.)

I'm having a blast, though. Part of it is because I love the planning and the unfolding of the plan. To wit: It's been tremendously gratifying to set out, from day one of this game, to weaken the Japanese navy to the point that John couldn't use it. I'm not quite there, but gracious! He hasn't felt able to commit a combat TF to the DEI in months...and only a single one to the Philippines. To play this deeply into the game so that very, very long-term plans are finally playing out is an amazingly fulfilling experience.

This is why I decided to not take on a third game. I have one in April 1943 and I see my time spent per trun going up at a fast rate. I realized that I was not going to have time to do three games at one time.

I am in August 1943, and the time per turn keeps increasing. I can easily see 3-4 hours per turn in a few months. I admire those forum members doing multiple games at the same time. I'm barely keeping up with one !

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Thanks.

Uh oh. I only have 643 naval support at Legaspi. Seemed like enough.

I need a staff. I find it hard to keep up with all the details. I've been through this exercise before, but it continues to elude me. Heck, it wasn't many months back that a damaged sub due for withdrawal sat at Pearl Harbor for a week because I couldn't figure out why she wouldn't withdraw.

It's my responsibility to learn and keep up with the rules. I've done a decent job, but there are gaping holes that prevent me from "optimal play" (in the words of the immortal Nemo).

I find it's usually faster and safer to just build the port a few levels than to round up Naval support, find a transport or three, and then escort them. Ports give VPs too. The PI is dense with medium-sized SPS bases. Two Seabee regiments work pretty well.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I think every AAR player is surprised when he learns the truth about the strength or weakness of his opponent's situation, the things his opponent most feared, etc. That's part of the game, unless a player is basically a savant or gifted with second-sight.

If you took it as a criticism I certainly didn't mean it that way.

I've done one AAR and probably won't do another. A lot of work, more than playing if you do it frequently. But I found it did grow a little tiring to listen to advice from onlookers who didn't know the full picture. The value of AARs is as teaching tools, and this one has amazing graphics and flow. But readers would be better served to be 90% consumers, and 10% contributors, especially in the late war.

I believe the hardest thing to do in the game is play the Allies in 1944-45. Harder than running the Japanese economy. There, inputs are under full control and outputs are exactly as expected. The degree of detail required to be managed in a Fun House is staggering, and those who haven't tried to do it should read and learn. Tossing off "you should go grab Vietnam" isn't realistic and borders on insane. That would be the work of months.

If I have stopped contributing here it's in large part for this reason. I've got nothing to add over what you're already doing. But I am learning things.

I humbly disagree [:)].

I meant from his current position in the PI. Not walk there. [:'(]

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58




If you took it as a criticism I certainly didn't mean it that way.

I've done one AAR and probably won't do another. A lot of work, more than playing if you do it frequently. But I found it did grow a little tiring to listen to advice from onlookers who didn't know the full picture. The value of AARs is as teaching tools, and this one has amazing graphics and flow. But readers would be better served to be 90% consumers, and 10% contributors, especially in the late war.

I believe the hardest thing to do in the game is play the Allies in 1944-45. Harder than running the Japanese economy. There, inputs are under full control and outputs are exactly as expected. The degree of detail required to be managed in a Fun House is staggering, and those who haven't tried to do it should read and learn. Tossing off "you should go grab Vietnam" isn't realistic and borders on insane. That would be the work of months.

If I have stopped contributing here it's in large part for this reason. I've got nothing to add over what you're already doing. But I am learning things.

I humbly disagree [:)].

I meant from his current position in the PI. Not walk there. [:'(]

So did I! I also declined to elaborate on my disagreement, but I'll do so in as short a fashion as I can here:

In this position, I would not go for an operation with the goal of holding coastal Indochina at all costs given the other situations in this game (the biggest one being that CR has greatly drawn down the Burma theater's strength and devoted it to the Pacific). So what would be the goal? In 3 words: making John panic.

"Crap! The Thailand defenders are getting cut off!"

Meanwhile, I'm going elsewhere... I view it as a Morton's Fork: where all outcomes benefit you. Just one of them benefits you even more. It's a scaling up of the whole strategy of feinting.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


Meanwhile, I'm going elsewhere... I view it as a Morton's Fork: where all outcomes benefit you. Just one of them benefits you even more. It's a scaling up of the whole strategy of feinting.

OK. That makes sense. His opponent is fairly emotional in his reactions. I don't know how that's possible in this game. [:)]

My response was mostly driven by prep time. If some decent ports--or one--in Indochina are un-garrisoned that could work. It would take most of the carrier force to drive the point home and get ashore, but then there might be some havoc to be had. Depending on the port the landing might be self-funding in supply terms.

[Canoerebel]

I don't think that would be a good strategy here. At this point, the Allies would be taking time and fuel and men to create a distraction...when those men could simply be added to the main event, thus shaving off a lot of time that would be lost.

It's academic here, however, as I'm not moving anywhere "across the seas" in the near future.

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

It's academic here, however, as I'm not moving anywhere "across the seas" in the near future.

Say that as many times as you want, but the fact is you already have.[:D]

[crsutton]

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

At this point it is pretty hard to pull of a miracle. Should have been attempted sooner by John. In my last campaign and current, I really can't say I won a single carrier fight. But never lost one enough to do me much harm and attrition to the Japanese fleet eventually did the job. John could win the next fight 3-2 in carriers and still will have lost. Because he does not get much more and the Allied faucet flows til then end. I know the Japanese get more to play with here but he is reaching the point of total inferiority. Fact is, he hates to lose his carriers but at this point the Japanese player is playing for time, not ships and should be ready to lose ships in droves if it can be strategically useful. Some say the Sam will be the great equalizer but I doubt it because by late 44-Japanese carriers become glass cannons no matter the planes on them.

A long shot for sure but with lots LBA, Kamikazes, the KB and a bit of luck it might be possible to push the inevitable back by a few months. Auto-Victory is off the table and Japan can not win in long run so at some point one must let the electrons fly or it will just be a game of piling up strategic bombing points. Maybe just wishful thinking on my part but deep down maybe John just wants to go down swinging

I agree with you. If he does not do it soon it will just get worse.

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: crsutton

I agree with you. If he does not do it soon it will just get worse.

No matter what John does it will just get worse. The nature of the beast!

I guess there are degrees.[;)]

[Cap Mandrake]

CR: <typing on his computer> I'm not moving anywhere "across the seas" in the near future. <a door swings ajar and a sursurration seems to come from nowhere> ...."Ryukyus.........."

[Flicker]

I appreciate the knowledge you all share: in just the last couple of pages I learned that paratroops don't need prep and some details of strat moves. These types of tips plus sharing tactics and strategies make this AAR a must read for me.

Oh yeah, CR... Shanghai!

[Canoerebel]

Time for bed. I hope to have a turn tomorrow. We missed today. John is still in the reasoning/acceptance stage.

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Time for bed. I hope to have a turn tomorrow. We missed today. John is still in the reasoning/acceptance stage.

I just gotta say that the "stages" of grief, as they are popularized, are mythical. While accurately named, nobody goes through grief in these steps or stages. It's more a combination of all of them, together, at a high intensity at first that gradually decreases. I suppose "acceptance", as it is laid out in these so-called stages, is simply saying that the grieving has receded to a background level.


I can go find sources for this, but I don't think I need to here [:'(].

[JohnDillworth]

I have been able to rearm Yamato in early May 1942 with Japanese AKE's (which are less capable than most USN versions) in a port too small to even allow the AKE's to dock . With Yamato and the 16 in guns of modern USN BB's you can usually only rearm one magazine at a time, even with multiple AKE's.

Can this be done in stock or is this in one of the mods? Hell of an advantage to Japan if they can reload 18.1" shells from and AKE that can't even dock

[Canoerebel]

John has banged up his ankle pretty bad, necessitating a pause in the game, a visit to the doctor, and hobbling around. He went to work today, so at least he's ambulatory. But he won't be legging out triples anytime soon. I think he'll get started on the game again, either tonight or tomorrow morning. I'm using the downtime to catch up at work.

[Canoerebel]

John wrote last night that he is feeling much better and will send a turn this morning.

In addition to his real life woes, I think the game situation has affected his morale. Like all of us, when things are going well he looks for any crack to flip a turn. When things aren't going well every situation becomes a reason not to attend to turns.

What I don't know is whether his malaise is general: a distaste for experiencing yet another turned with dozens of uncontested Allied 2EB and 4EB attacks on his troops in Burma and the Philippines. This has been going on for 135 turns now, and it's got to be discouraging.

Or is it specific: has he already run the turn and experienced something unpleasant (I don't think this is the case, because John usually flips a turn quickly when something really bad has happened).

Or is it inchoate: a dawning realization that he's going to have to commit KB bumping up against every fiber in his being urging him not to "Banzai!" his beloved carriers.

He's in a tough spot right now, so I'm trying to give him some space (so don't any readers of John's AAR whisper in his ear that I'm anxious for a turn). He needs space, and he's entitled to some.

[Lokasenna]

I'd wager on inchoate.

[MakeeLearn]

Or inchoately seeking a specific reason.