Chutes and Ladders (Grauwolf(j) vs Mundy(a) LST Bottleneck Mod

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Bif1961
Posts: 2014
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:52 pm
Location: Phenix City, Alabama

RE: Chutes and Ladders (Grauwolf(j) vs Mundy(a) LST Bottleneck Mod

Post by Bif1961 »

From the Ship sunk VPs it doesn't look like you sank any BBs at PH, as it lists 54 Allied ships sunk for only 188 points. The sailing ships around PI represent the Lanikai, Roosevelt's attempt to start the war before the Japanese attacked.
User avatar
LargeSlowTarget
Posts: 5051
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hessen, Germany - now living in France

RE: Chutes and Ladders (Grauwolf(j) vs Mundy(a) LST Bottleneck Mod

Post by LargeSlowTarget »

Hi,

as said in Mundy's thread, I really appreciate that you are testing and providing feedback on the Bottlenecks mod. And as in the other thread, I'll jump right in:
3. A lot of units start in STRAT mode and are moving. This includes the vast majority of units in HI, a bunch in Manchuria/Korea and China as well. I'm not sure the exact purpose for this, other than again collection points. There does seem to be an effort in Manchuria to group Division units together to they can be combined. Maybe it was easier this way than manually moving units via the editor. My only real guess is this is what LST would typically do if he were to play Japan.
The purpose is indeed collection and concentration of forces. Many of the Kwantung arty and tank units are heading to the Chinese border, awaiting PP-buy-out to cross. Other units are heading for recombination with other sub-units. I could have moved them via editor, but in case someone wants to start with historical turn off and has other plans for certain units, they will start at their historic location.

4. Attempts were made to give the japanese aircraft their original name, as well as the allied nickname. I find this displeasing to my eyes as I have to learn and memorize them now. Not a bad thing, I just find it annoying and unnecessary.
Mundy has similar thoughts. I actually wanted to use Japanese names for immersion, with Allied names in brackets. However, I did not find all Japanese names for all plane models, so some just have the Allied name. I admit it is incoherent, I will change that to Allied names with Japanese names in brackets if known.
6. Task force colors, I was pleasantly surprised by this. Not ground breaking, and I was on the fence about it after reading about it first in the documentation, but when in game I felt the distinction it provided was a bonus. I think amphibious TF could be a different color however.
It was difficult to find "fill" colors that provide enough contrast in connection with all the different colors used for the different nations. I'll see if can find something better for amphib.
7. Not sure why I saved this to point number 7, but the pre-calculated damage (ie airfield, aircraft and PH strike damage) already on the map leaves me feeling cheated. Will the Arizona sink? or will the dockyards save it. As the Japan player I wonder if I' missing out on potential VPs, or preventing for the possibility of different results.
Sorry, no points for aircraft "destroyed" by scenario design. Arizona and Oklahoma however are at Pearl with 99 sys, 99 flt and 99 fires - with fires burning the cannot be docked in the yards, and with those damage levels they have always sunk during turn execution in all my tests - so point will be awarded.
8. No alternative initial port strike option. I like having the option to hit a different port other than PH. I like hitting Manila, not necessarily for the submarines, but in keeping the KB in that region to support expansion. And there is no guarantee the Repulse/POW will sink in an historical fashion and are free to roam and cause havoc without fear of the KB lurking by for some time.
I'm a strong advocate of a Dec 7th PM or Dec 8th start with historic damage, because the results of the PH strikes can vary a lot (between no BB and five BBs sunk), which may trigger bad feelings and motivational loss from the beginning (see the recent "Cheating and Historical Turn 1" thread) - not an issue if both sides know what to expect. And being a "historic" mod, "my" war starts with a PH strike. However, feel free to edit the scenario and move KB back to the Kuriles and with first-turn movement bonus in place.
9. All air units are set to training @ 100. I would rather they were just stood down with training @ 0 instead. I guess I found a few extra mouse clicks after all.
Editor restraint. You can use the two "Show all air groups" screens and stand-down all planes with a few clicks.
Was Sichuan province really that sparsely populated? I understand that the lowlands needed the additional bases for garrisoning, but the contrast between the two places breaks immersion.
Sichuan is around Chengtu, right? Unfortunately the number of location slots is limited, so I had none left after populating the lowland areas. I started with the regions most likely to see battles. If my China modifications work as intended, no Japanese forces should ever get near Sichuan.
1) Discovered many RGC units can be broken down, this will ease the pain of meeting garrison requirements in china somewhat.
Most of them are already broken-down and "in position" to garrison the "points-and-lines" i.e. cities and roads/railroads. A few more puppet units can be "freed" by juggling garrison forces around. This should allow for some limited Japanese offensives, but not for major pushes. I do want to "brake" the Japanese expansion, but without turning the mod into a "quiet China" version.
2) The roads/Rail Network can blend a little too well into the map making it hard to distinguish.
Granted, I have explained why I elected to use Pacifica Bellum v2 in the other AAR. You can use the "y" et "r" keys to display the networks.
1) Most LCU seem to have a certain % disabled at start of scenario. This, in some cases, forces VP losses from lack of garrisons in China. Not sure if this is by design or just an oversight. They will eventually rebuild and fulfill the adequate garrison requirements.
Disablement is designed, but the VP loss is not - did not pay attention that some units have less margin then others. Could you pls provide the unit numbers?
2) Haven't compared to other scenarios, but pilots seem in shorter supply at outset.
Well spotted, pilot numbers have been slightly revised. However, for the Japanese side you should see no difference - in 1941, IJA receives 200 instead of 195 pilots/month in stock, the IJN 150 in both stock and bottlenecks. It is the US Army Airforce and the US Navy who got nerfed a bit, while the Marines actually gain a few more pilots in 1943, again compared to stock.
1. I guess the Yamato is available in 3 days (Dec 15th) it appears it will need dock time as it only has half it guns representing the issues it had historically and will require an upgrade to bring all the big guns into working condition.
The guns are all there, but their accuracy is halved, since there have been issues within the gunnery department which resulted in very poor shooting during trials. The upgrade will cure the issues.
1. The allies are given a bunch of sailboats, they have no armament and very little cargo capacity. For Japan, they are free experience trainers and VPs. Their relevancy can be debated, but only LST know's their true purpose. The novelty of sinking a sail boat faded by the third one.

Low-VP assets available early in the war. Intended for evacuating units, supplying small forward bases, or for desperate blockade-running attempts to the PI, Singers or other places under the enemy's air superiority. Some PI islands have a small supply production (local food production) and the small craft may be used to shuttle supplies to Bataan with lesser risk (or at least lesser loss) than ordinary xAKs. Btw, Japan gets more Daihatsus, sampans, junks and pearling luggers for the same purpose.
As the new stuff with the scenario becomes old...
Well, there is more new stuff or at least modifications of existing stuff to be discovered :-)


Thanks for your feedback, I'm looking forward for more.

Have fun!
atheory
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 6:17 pm

RE: Chutes and Ladders (Grauwolf(j) vs Mundy(a) LST Bottleneck Mod

Post by atheory »

Dec 17th

3 Torpedoes found their way into an allied AO. That's three early on that have "warmly" received torpedoes. I like this trend.

Manila appears abandoned, maybe leaving behind one PA division. I'm a little surprised by this as Bataan, once cut off, does not produce supplies unlike Manila.

Limited offensive operations conducted in China. 4 small areas taken. I think there are enough RGC divisions left to be broken down to open up pathways to larger Chinese cities. My Goal is push the Chinese theater to see what can be done by a determined Japanese player maximizing the assets available. Point in case already has been Wenchow falling so early.

Observations
1. In China, I'm unsure if the chinese admin units are either dying from air bombardment or moving to another hex, but some are disappearing and leaving them open for Japan occupation. Already one such location has been occupied without troops directly in the hex, which is now costing me VPs. So I must struggle to find some units to put into that location, even considering dropping a para unit temporarily.
atheory
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 6:17 pm

RE: Chutes and Ladders (Grauwolf(j) vs Mundy(a) LST Bottleneck Mod

Post by atheory »

ORIGINAL: Bif1961

From the Ship sunk VPs it doesn't look like you sank any BBs at PH, as it lists 54 Allied ships sunk for only 188 points. The sailing ships around PI represent the Lanikai, Roosevelt's attempt to start the war before the Japanese attacked.


Correct, as of Dec 17th, I've no indication of nor VPs for any BB that may have sunk at PH.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Chutes and Ladders (Grauwolf(j) vs Mundy(a) LST Bottleneck Mod

Post by Lowpe »

ORIGINAL: GrauWolf80

1. In China, I'm unsure if the chinese admin units are either dying from air bombardment or moving to another hex, but some are disappearing and leaving them open for Japan occupation. Already one such location has been occupied without troops directly in the hex, which is now costing me VPs. So I must struggle to find some units to put into that location, even considering dropping a para unit temporarily.

I thought I read somewhere there was organic supply generation for the Chinese that would prevent the small garrison units from starving like this.
atheory
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 6:17 pm

RE: Chutes and Ladders (Grauwolf(j) vs Mundy(a) LST Bottleneck Mod

Post by atheory »

Yes, most, if not all have a little resource and light industry present. I'm not sure this is the issue at hand, but closer to what I expressed above. As more turns are processed I'll keep a closer eye on the area and give follow up observations.
atheory
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 6:17 pm

RE: Chutes and Ladders (Grauwolf(j) vs Mundy(a) LST Bottleneck Mod

Post by atheory »

Dec 18th

Quiet turn, decided to finally look at supply and was surprised. I shouldn't have been as the documentation clearly talks about the reduced production overall compared to other scenarios. It was advised not to go nuts with expanding engines/airframes too early. Therefore, I decided to do just that. I'm stressing the current supply situation while adhering to the approach taken in the current climate. I may be in for a rude awakening, but I will monitor it closely.
atheory
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 6:17 pm

RE: Chutes and Ladders (Grauwolf(j) vs Mundy(a) LST Bottleneck Mod

Post by atheory »

Dec 19th

In an amusing twist, Manila having been fully abandoned, converted to Japanese control even though no forces were adjacent to it. Now I get to rapidly try and get troops there so partisans don't destroy everything and before I lose too many VPs.

Submarines sink a DM and RO-36 throws a couple torps at a U.S. sub, sinking it. Thought I had a screen shot the latter, but I failed in this ;(

atheory
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 6:17 pm

RE: Chutes and Ladders (Grauwolf(j) vs Mundy(a) LST Bottleneck Mod

Post by atheory »

Dec 20th

First real mistake was made, tried to be cute and switched my netties at Saigon from port strike singapore to naval attack & Port strike. They decided to hit the task force up in Rangoon and were mauled by CAP.....sad panda.

With the current expansion plan, I'm losing about 45k in supplies a day on the HI. Which means, for a scenario not generous in supply stockpiles I have a few days left at full production before I have to drastically cut back. Build more LI we shall, then we'll build some more, and after that we'll build some more :)
atheory
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 6:17 pm

RE: Chutes and Ladders (Grauwolf(j) vs Mundy(a) LST Bottleneck Mod

Post by atheory »

Dec 21st

Tokyo is out of supplies! Turned off the majority of my repairing factories and will slowly turn them back on as more LI factories come online. The scenario documentation made it quite clear about the fragility of the economy early on and not to rapidly expand. Thus, naturally I had to see this for myself. All I did was expand normally as one would in a DBB-28 to 30 scenario as I wanted to see the contrast. And did I find it! :)

Below is an image of the current state of progress in the main lines of expansion. I am not disheartened with the inability to blitz the SRA when compared to previous scenarios, as I know the allies themselves are also hampered in their ability to react and reinforce early on as well. Again, more so than in other scenarios. So attention was made to create a balance and we will find out just how much balance there is in the days to come.

Image
atheory
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 6:17 pm

RE: Chutes and Ladders (Grauwolf(j) vs Mundy(a) LST Bottleneck Mod

Post by atheory »

Dec 22nd

I forgot to mention previously that Chinese guerilla units infiltrated Anyang last turn and took control of it. A nearby Japanese Division has been alerted and dispatched to retake the city.

As for this turn, relatively quiet, with Singapore and Bataan receiving the bulk of my air power. Another empty hex in China converted to Japanese control with no ability to meet the garrison requirements at the moment. Did receive a security unit in Tokyo, but it will take a few days to get it shipped to China.

Tokyo supply increased this turn after stopping the repairing of many factories. Will continue to monitor.

atheory
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 6:17 pm

RE: Chutes and Ladders (Grauwolf(j) vs Mundy(a) LST Bottleneck Mod

Post by atheory »

Dec 23rd and 24th

Been a quick pace today, these two turns seemed to have just blurred together.

An isolated PA division surrendered. That's one less at Bataan at least.

Sadly i botched my screen shot of a Thai Submarine landing a torpedo hit....but, it's party time!
atheory
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 6:17 pm

RE: Chutes and Ladders (Grauwolf(j) vs Mundy(a) LST Bottleneck Mod

Post by atheory »

Dec 25th

I need to work on my screen shot taking. Is there a program that just auto saves screen shots without me having to paste them to paint and then save them?

My surface fleet caught a cargo task force unloading at Port Moresby. All 10 ships were lost. Maybe I can bait Force Z here, assuming it regrouped somewhere around Australia. We shall see.

Mundy is being very aggressive with Chinese units, launching multiple attacks. No doubt he is "feeling" out the theater as it is a new experience for us both. No doubt his little coup at Anyang has emboldened him.
atheory
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 6:17 pm

RE: Chutes and Ladders (Grauwolf(j) vs Mundy(a) LST Bottleneck Mod

Post by atheory »

Dec 26th

My fears came to fruition. Force Z combined with other warships in the SRA merged together into one large flotilla and under the cover of darkness managed to strike my baby carrier Ryujo and sink it :(

My only blessing is the time my opponent waited to unleash it, otherwise it probably would have caused more damage if more aggressively used, especially with the KB starting at PH. But when he did use it, it was effective sadly. I have another KB fleet nearby that landed some torps into a couple light cruisers, hopefully the next day I can position correctly to deal more revenge damage.

I've stated from the beginning that I didn't like the idea of KB being forced to PH, while Force Z was given latitude to adjust its fate.

Land movement rates must be adjusted, some movements feel like they are taking forever, or maybe I'm still just adjusting to the "slower" pace of expansion :)
User avatar
PaxMondo
Posts: 11129
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:23 pm

RE: Chutes and Ladders (Grauwolf(j) vs Mundy(a) LST Bottleneck Mod

Post by PaxMondo »

Ouch, 48 planes gone from the KB ... [:(]
Pax
atheory
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 6:17 pm

RE: Chutes and Ladders (Grauwolf(j) vs Mundy(a) LST Bottleneck Mod

Post by atheory »

Dec 27th

My hopes to catching their battle fleet, which fled towards java was thwarted by the many smaller vessels floating about. I have a STF and CTF besieging as best they can the port of Surabaya. Lots of ships there, and I'm hoping a few port strikes might do some damage. We shall see. Without a "sir robin" Singapore is packed to the brim with units. I'm scared to think what casualties will be inflicted when I'm ready to cross.


Sadly the Ryujo's loss could have been prevented, that's on me. I only mean to use it to further high lite what effect Force Z can have in the SRA with the KB forced to PH. Even the threat of the KB striking manila or singapore instead of PH could give extra caution to the allied player, but without this check it is possible for force Z to run rampant during much of December. The battleship fleet watching Malaya can't be everywhere. My point, with the attempt to create a historical japanese approach to early expansion, can be made moot by the free hand of Force Z. I am curious what a more aggressive allied player might accomplish with Force Z + the US/Dutch warships in the SRA before the main KB can return. My KB got there around 24-25 of December, so that's nearly 17-18 days for it to operate. Maybe additional battleships could be rushed in from Tokyo, probably shortening that by a few days. In a scenario already slowed down, a further week or two delays in troop landings could be huge. Who's to say, food for thought at this point in time.

atheory
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 6:17 pm

RE: Chutes and Ladders (Grauwolf(j) vs Mundy(a) LST Bottleneck Mod

Post by atheory »

Dec 28-29th

Force Z and it's cohorts have fled north, running to Ceylon? Still plenty of small fish to catch at Soerabaja and catching them I am.

Enemy CVs spotted near Port Moresby. I doubt the CVs would be alone, so I'm assuming both Ent and Lex are there.

My midway bombardment fleets decided to bombard Kure Atoll instead....causing a face palm moment.
User avatar
LargeSlowTarget
Posts: 5051
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hessen, Germany - now living in France

RE: Chutes and Ladders (Grauwolf(j) vs Mundy(a) LST Bottleneck Mod

Post by LargeSlowTarget »

ORIGINAL: GrauWolf80
I only mean to use it to further high lite what effect Force Z can have in the SRA with the KB forced to PH. Even the threat of the KB striking manila or singapore instead of PH could give extra caution to the allied player, but without this check it is possible for force Z to run rampant during much of December. The battleship fleet watching Malaya can't be everywhere. My point, with the attempt to create a historical japanese approach to early expansion, can be made moot by the free hand of Force Z. I am curious what a more aggressive allied player might accomplish with Force Z + the US/Dutch warships in the SRA before the main KB can return. My KB got there around 24-25 of December, so that's nearly 17-18 days for it to operate. Maybe additional battleships could be rushed in from Tokyo, probably shortening that by a few days. In a scenario already slowed down, a further week or two delays in troop landings could be huge. Who's to say, food for thought at this point in time.

Well, even with Force Z NOT being sent to auto-demise in this scenario, you are doing quite well, being more or less on time or even well in advance of the historic timeline (game dates in blue) :

December 10, 1941 - Japanese invade the Philippines and seize Guam > Tuguegarao December 9, 1941 - Aparri December 10, 1941 - Guam December 13, 1941

December 16, 1941 - Japanese invade British Borneo (Miri, Brunei) > Miri December 14, 1941, Brunei Bay-Seria December 27, 1941

December 22, 1941 - Japanese main landing on Luzon > Lingayen December 18, 1941

December 25, 1941 - British surrender at Hong Kong > December 13, 1941

January 3, 1942 - Japan captures Kuantan > December 11, 1941

January 11, 1942 - Japanese invade Dutch East Indies and Dutch Borneo (Tarakan, Menado) > Tarakan December 22, 1941 - Manado December 28, 1941

January 26, 1942 - Japan occupies Mersing > December 14, 1941

March 23, 1942 - Japanese invade the Andaman Islands in the Bay of Bengal > December 27, 1941

Since slowing-down the ops tempo was the goal of this mod, having Force Z injecting some caution into Japanese expansion plans seems fine for me.

I am actually surprises that Mundy did not use Force Z trying to prevent the landings at Mersing. Force Z could hide under air cover at Singers within reaction range of Mersing. In my ongoing DBB game against IdahoNYer, he saved Force Z as well and used it to harass me in the DEI (for example thrashing my air base at Jolo), but I eventually put it under and managed to capture the DEI more or less on schedule.
User avatar
Mundy
Posts: 2874
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2002 6:12 am
Location: Neenah

RE: Chutes and Ladders (Grauwolf(j) vs Mundy(a) LST Bottleneck Mod

Post by Mundy »

ORIGINAL: LargeSlowTarget
I am actually surprises that Mundy did not use Force Z trying to prevent the landings at Mersing. Force Z could hide under air cover at Singers within reaction range of Mersing. In my ongoing DBB game against IdahoNYer, he saved Force Z as well and used it to harass me in the DEI (for example thrashing my air base at Jolo), but I eventually put it under and managed to capture the DEI more or less on schedule.

I've tried this in more stock games rushing them up on Dec 7, but my results have been mixed. Usually they get caught anyway, but a few times, I did savage Haruna pretty badly with PoW. I just had cold feet this time around. Lately I've preferred to spring them on a Balikpapan landing, as that one base in Celebes is in easy reach of there. Being disbanded, unless the IJN really recons that little nobody base, he won't know they're there.
Image
atheory
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 6:17 pm

RE: Chutes and Ladders (Grauwolf(j) vs Mundy(a) LST Bottleneck Mod

Post by atheory »

Dec 30th

Port strike on Soerabaja causing much damage to shipping there.


I actually had hoped force Z would attack Mersing, I was confident my battlefleet was more than a match for it. As Mundy eluded to, striking Mersing is still risky, even without KB nearby. If I knew Japan BB were near Mersing, I'd send force Z to North Borneo, even PI and harass shipping there. Much more confident taking on Heavy Cruisers than going toe to toe with other BB.

A fair point on force Z slowing down the expansion tempo. It is this aspect I don't have an issue with. I quite like the slower pace, so long as the allies face similar constraints. The fact that I can equate slower pace to historical progression I think says it all about just how fast the early game really is in most other scenarios.
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”