The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

[Canoerebel]

ORIGINAL: JeffK

IMVHO

I think the para starting, "Georgia's mountain poet" is one too many paras quoting someone.

The others have enough "fill" around them, this seems to be 1 too many.

Thanks, JeffK, for that thought. I'm going to lay the story aside for a few days or weeks. Then I'll come back to it with a fresher perspective. When I do, I'll give particular attention to the Byron Reece paragraph.

P.S. I've never done something like that before - working all night, beginning a story and seeing it through to the end (subject to lots of future editing). It was pretty fun. The hours flew by.

[Canoerebel]

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth
Gaius Marius was a great Roman General who would only fight on his own terms and at a place of his choosing. Initially, his Legions thought him a poor general at best and more likely a coward. His opponents would taunt him and try to get him to attack saying, "if you are such a great general why not come here and fight us" to which he would respond "surely if you were a great opponent you could make me do such a thing". Gaius Marius stuck to his guns and eventually his opponents attached him at the place of his choosing. With the sun at his back (by design) Gaius Marius annihilated a larger force at the Battle of Vercellae, saving Rome from a barbarian invasion. He was celebrated as the third founder of Rome. I say all of this because it frustrates some of the peanut gallery (myself included) that you let ships escape without air attack and allow divisions to sail to battle unopposed. I also say this because I thought a Roman analogy would be a nice change from yet another Civil War analogy Your a good General Dan. Stick to your guns

Hey, John, those are good words. Thanks.

[Canoerebel]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

"Garrison" VP losses are minor, but there are supply flow effects too, as well as potential destruction of base infrastructure. Randomized, and maybe also a functi0on of base size. I think there was a pretty significant change to the garrison penalty rules in a very early patch, but I don't recall the details.

I foresaw the garrison issues coming, to an extent. I tried to take steps to meet the need, to an extent. But the Allied advance outstripped my ability to get units as far forward as needed. And then the opportunity to move on Gunzan fast outweighed the need to keep units at Shanghai.

In John's email to me several days back, he made the stellar observation that I should have waited two more weeks to invade Korea. He simply has no clue about the various needs and opportunities guiding my hand. The weakness of Gunzan's garrison, the availability of the supply in an amount needed, the current fuel state of the Allied fleet; and the increasing pressure to detach DS to return to the DEI for more supply. I have to keep DS on station until Gunzan is self-sufficient: level 7 or 8 airfield with 500 fighters and many combat TFs. But I should have waited two weeks so that I could take better advantage of his troop deployment in China. "They're arrogant folks, you know?" (Gettysburg character speaking of the Rebels forming up and attacking again.)

[JeffroK]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

ORIGINAL: JeffK

IMVHO

I think the para starting, "Georgia's mountain poet" is one too many paras quoting someone.

The others have enough "fill" around them, this seems to be 1 too many.

Thanks, JeffK, for that thought. I'm going to lay the story aside for a few days or weeks. Then I'll come back to it with a fresher perspective. When I do, I'll give particular attention to the Byron Reece paragraph.

P.S. I've never done something like that before - working all night, beginning a story and seeing it through to the end (subject to lots of future editing). It was pretty fun. The hours flew by.

I suppose, if you take it out and you loose nothing from the piece then it shouldnt be there. If it leaves a gaping hole, put it back.

[Canoerebel]

John's going to spend the next few days with his mother; then we'll both be around Saturday to game; then I'm going to spend two days with my mom. All this developed very suddenly. So we'll mostly stand down for the next six days.

[T Rav]

Communication is very difficult. Had you not posted the previous email regarding your short-term turn expectations, we all would've been wondering what happened...

Sounds trivial, but most of us are lurkers, eagerly awaiting the next update. Thanks to you and JIII for a great game to see play out.

T Rav

[DW]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

John's going to spend the next few days with his mother; then we'll both be around Saturday to game; then I'm going to spend two days with my mom. All this developed very suddenly. So we'll mostly stand down for the next six days.

Why do I feel like... "We now have but one choice. We must face the long dark of Moria ..."

[Encircled]

You know, even Jeb Stuart only rode around the Union Army twice.....

And never via California

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

"Garrison" VP losses are minor, but there are supply flow effects too, as well as potential destruction of base infrastructure. Randomized, and maybe also a functi0on of base size. I think there was a pretty significant change to the garrison penalty rules in a very early patch, but I don't recall the details.

I foresaw the garrison issues coming, to an extent. I tried to take steps to meet the need, to an extent. But the Allied advance outstripped my ability to get units as far forward as needed. And then the opportunity to move on Gunzan fast outweighed the need to keep units at Shanghai.

I only posted my comment to remind that there is more effect from a lacking garrison than the tiny VP penalty. At this point and with the map you have I doubt there is any hex that traces only one supply path through a base in turmoil, or that you care much if an AF takes 20% riot damage. When I have time I should look for the patch notes that described the change. My best recollection was the penalty was made worse from the as-shipped penalty when missing the garrison floor.

[Canoerebel]

Yeah, I knew what you meant.

It's just another fascinating aspect of the game. With regard to Shanghai, for instance, that important base has a 720 garrison requirement. I had that covered but stripped nearly every unit away to invade Gunzan. I did so mostly knowingly, calculating that the benefits far outweighed the costs. I think that's definitely the case now that I'm a week into it, but Shanghai airfield is a shambles. That's a bit of a concern because I have some combat ships repairing at the big shipyard there. I'll feel a lot better when the new garrison troops arrive, particularly a 600 AV Chinese unit inbound from Changsha.

Anticipating and managing garrison requirements in a rapidly moving and enormous front is just one small aspect of this incredibly intricate, challenging, exciting and fulfilling game. What more is there to ask for from a game?

[Canoerebel]

2/6/45

John sent this turn yesterday, but I didn't begin attending to it until last night. I'll probably go through and gradually post a lot of screen shots dealing with various things.

KB East: Looks like John's recalling his carriers to Lunga/Tulagi. To this point its mission has been a bust. Where does it go next?

[Canoerebel]

2/6/45

Fancy Pants: Hong Kong falls. Basically nothing left to do south of the Yangtze except containment and mop-up work. North of the Yangtze, the Allied advance continues.

Funnell Cakes: Gunzan is quickly developing. John will probably feed forces into this fray (carrying out his threat to commit 8,137 AV and all the other things he can come up with). I should be able to use Gunzan airfield offensively in ten days or so. Other than that, the plan is to allow John to impale himself on hardened targets: Allied armies, Allied aircraft, Allied ships.

[Canoerebel]

Photo of the USS Atlanta, Tacoma, Washington, October 26, 1945. This is a Cleveland-class light cruiser, name for the CLAA of the same name sunk during the Guadalcanal campaign.

[FlyByKnight]

I do wonder how much fight the IJN in the Home islands has left in it. Seems like John is down to Matsu/Tachibana class destroyers for escorts.
Have you considered launching major Carrier-based attacks on the big Japanese ports?

[Canoerebel]

He is using a lot of those smaller destroyers. They have their uses, but he's pretty stretched for escorts.

I've considered striking Japanese ports by carrier or by LBA. I've done so once or twice, hitting a bunch of small stuff at Nagasaki a number of weeks back.

I think he's moved most of his good ships up north, to places like Ominato or Sapporo. He'll have decent fighters to protect against 4EB. I won't send Death Star that far away anytime soon, as fuel is an issue and since protecting Gunzan is a much higher priority and directly and indirectly yields points far more efficiently.

[JeffroK]

Is there any sign of a wall of troops heading out of Manchuria??

Or has JIII discovered he bought out the best troops and left a rabble behind?

I think Keijo is vital, means he must detrain a few hexes further out.

[paullus99]

Again, if he even begins to think that his troops are going to be able to stand up to your forces, he's fooling himself.

[Crackaces]

ORIGINAL: paullus99

Again, if he even begins to think that his troops are going to be able to stand up to your forces, he's fooling himself.

The combats should start showing (-) supply and the effects becoming quite apparent. Committing High AV ...low supply .. low firepower is the worst of all decisions vs high firepower well supplied Allied forces .. The IJA will be locked into hexes they cannot willingly retreat .. but suffer innumerable losses until the AV ratio dictates the retreat.
Then there is all the open terrain that will face a slaughter from the air ..
From my limited experience the capture of Taikyu and cutting of supply of Fusan to the rest of the world will have effects until this game is over -- the units out of bases are going to suck the bases dry .. including places the IJ would like to fly aircraft . very soon the only viable bases will be the home islands

[MakeeLearn]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Yeah, when I refer to "poets," I mean all of us - collectively. Like BBfanboy says, there's a bit of poet in every one of us.

I'm not much of a poet. Really, I'm not one at all. I've written about eight poems that I'm not ashamed of. I've written a bunch that I am ashamed of. Some of the words that ended up "on paper" were incredibly bad.

But avid readers and avid writers often have a love affair with words. Some writers can make words sing. Some make them squeak in protest.

Searching for just the right word is fun. When you find it, the satisfaction is amazing. As Mark Twain said, the difference between a good word and the perfect words is as the difference between the lightning bug and lightning.

I read the story to my class today. Their reaction was what I had hoped for. But they are prejudiced - I knew they would appreciate the topic, and they know and tolerate my writing and speaking. Still, they make a good sounding board. For now, I'll put it aside for a few days, then re-read it with a fresh eye.

Words pale compared to the musical sound. For words pass through the intellect first, whereas a musical note goes straight to deep inward feelings. Can words be made visceral, given the timbre, phrasing, articulation, and vibrato of a musical instrument rather than that of just a sung word. Words can have too much Pre-definition, a musical tone is defined by the listener. Explained in a "slight return" of Twain - To strike like lightning straight to deep inward feelings instead of fluttering around the intellect like a lightning bug.

[witpqs]

For words pass through the intellect first

Mine too? [:'(]