Wow. Congrats. I will actually read the allied side on this one as it is intriguing.ORIGINAL: ny59giants_MatrixForum
Beanie (Norm) sent me a PM so I'm trying to get word back from his opponent to continue as new Allied High Command.
I'll try to do an AAR as this game will be different from others.
Please stand by,
Michael
Two questions about a West Coast invasion
Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition
RE: Two questions about a West Coast invasion
Pax
-
ny59giants
- Posts: 9888
- Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm
RE: Two questions about a West Coast invasion
It's the Allied turn, so I'll treat it like turn 2 and go through the whole map. [X(]
Lot's of stuff to do...click, click, click, etc.
Lot's of stuff to do...click, click, click, etc.
[center]
[/center]
[/center]
RE: Two questions about a West Coast invasion
To start with I've not read the whole thread, so if I'm repeating something please forgive.
Also don't take what I'm saying too literally, or as being too harsh.
Using the 'Search' here is a bit of an art more than science. Next time I recommend using different keywords. Also I find checking the 'less precise' (or whatever it says) box useful.
Please don't you'll be missing a great game once you've learned the lessons.
I believe you've also said you invested ~100 hours. Well I think I did that on my last first turn as Japan.[:D] Yeah, since I retired I spend ~100 hours every two weeks between the game and forum. Used to get that about every month when I was working. Not that you have to invest that much to this "time vampire" of game. The quote is from a player quite some time ago, but is very descriptive. The game is not for the weak of heart.
OK, that said, what happened to you is that you learned the hard way to take nothing for granted with this beast. If you think something is impossible you will quickly find an opponent here who will prove you wrong. As you will hear you need to keep as many of your units busy doing something more so than nothing. At the very least you need to keep all those home bound units building to help avoid an AV in '43. What this means is that you'll need the points for all those bases you can build up to offset your losses so as to compensate for the early point differentials that you'll experience. Now fort building doesn't count for the point offset, but its the first thing you'll need to do. As soon as the coast is secure build the ports/airfields to the max. As the Allies the supply costs to do this are inconsequential.
The layers of this game are immense and I learn something new almost every day, and I've been at it for more time than I care to admit. You know what, I'll never know it all, and I don't really expect to. Now I'm dying to do a PBEM, but I'm 'listening' to what I'm 'hearing' on the forum. So in order to not screw-up a game and waste time I keep at the AI. I expect to finally get there by the end of the year.
Now we are two different people so your way obviously doesn't have to be mine, nor would I expect it to be. You though will have to accept some more trial and error through PBEM than I. Not that I expect that I'll just breeze through when the time comes. Au contraire I fully expect to have my head handed to me on a platter once I go up against one of the real 'gurus' of this game. So like myself I suggest you pick and choose a player of your own experience level next time you delve into the 'deep end'. In addition send some e-mails back and forth describing what you want/expect. You and your opponent must choose each other to hopefully find a compatible experience.
OK, so I didn't notice whether you're playing stock or a 'mod'. If stock and you haven't read any AAR's (or maybe even if you have) I'd suggest you read Mike Solli's which is on scenario 1. It's the only one I've read all the way through so far. The game isn't for everyone, but if its your cup of tea don't give up too easily as it'll be your loss.
Remember its just a game and the only real thing you have to loose is time.[:D] So keep on running turns, reading the forum, and don't be afraid to ask questions as you can see there are many still here who are willing to help. This also applies while your in a game. Such as 'Early game as Allies what do I need to do first?' You'll get a bunch of responses. One you already know is to fortify and occupy west coast cities. Hey, just for fun watch the movie 1941.[:D]
Anyway hope you're not too discouraged and continue to 'soldier' on. Ciao.[8D]
Also don't take what I'm saying too literally, or as being too harsh.
when I typed the search keyword "Portland" in this forum, I didn't get any records returned
Using the 'Search' here is a bit of an art more than science. Next time I recommend using different keywords. Also I find checking the 'less precise' (or whatever it says) box useful.
I'm ready to give up on PBEM for a long time again because the rewards don't seem to be worth the risks.
Please don't you'll be missing a great game once you've learned the lessons.
I believe you've also said you invested ~100 hours. Well I think I did that on my last first turn as Japan.[:D] Yeah, since I retired I spend ~100 hours every two weeks between the game and forum. Used to get that about every month when I was working. Not that you have to invest that much to this "time vampire" of game. The quote is from a player quite some time ago, but is very descriptive. The game is not for the weak of heart.
OK, that said, what happened to you is that you learned the hard way to take nothing for granted with this beast. If you think something is impossible you will quickly find an opponent here who will prove you wrong. As you will hear you need to keep as many of your units busy doing something more so than nothing. At the very least you need to keep all those home bound units building to help avoid an AV in '43. What this means is that you'll need the points for all those bases you can build up to offset your losses so as to compensate for the early point differentials that you'll experience. Now fort building doesn't count for the point offset, but its the first thing you'll need to do. As soon as the coast is secure build the ports/airfields to the max. As the Allies the supply costs to do this are inconsequential.
The layers of this game are immense and I learn something new almost every day, and I've been at it for more time than I care to admit. You know what, I'll never know it all, and I don't really expect to. Now I'm dying to do a PBEM, but I'm 'listening' to what I'm 'hearing' on the forum. So in order to not screw-up a game and waste time I keep at the AI. I expect to finally get there by the end of the year.
Now we are two different people so your way obviously doesn't have to be mine, nor would I expect it to be. You though will have to accept some more trial and error through PBEM than I. Not that I expect that I'll just breeze through when the time comes. Au contraire I fully expect to have my head handed to me on a platter once I go up against one of the real 'gurus' of this game. So like myself I suggest you pick and choose a player of your own experience level next time you delve into the 'deep end'. In addition send some e-mails back and forth describing what you want/expect. You and your opponent must choose each other to hopefully find a compatible experience.
OK, so I didn't notice whether you're playing stock or a 'mod'. If stock and you haven't read any AAR's (or maybe even if you have) I'd suggest you read Mike Solli's which is on scenario 1. It's the only one I've read all the way through so far. The game isn't for everyone, but if its your cup of tea don't give up too easily as it'll be your loss.
Remember its just a game and the only real thing you have to loose is time.[:D] So keep on running turns, reading the forum, and don't be afraid to ask questions as you can see there are many still here who are willing to help. This also applies while your in a game. Such as 'Early game as Allies what do I need to do first?' You'll get a bunch of responses. One you already know is to fortify and occupy west coast cities. Hey, just for fun watch the movie 1941.[:D]
Anyway hope you're not too discouraged and continue to 'soldier' on. Ciao.[8D]
It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume
In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche
Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb
In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche
Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb
RE: Two questions about a West Coast invasion
I think Hans just enjoys twisting JFB tails.
ps. I won't deny the last accusation is often true, but it is not the source of my passion on this point.
Oh, Hans what would we do without you????[8|][X(][:'(][:D]
It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume
In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche
Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb
In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche
Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb
-
HansBolter
- Posts: 7453
- Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:30 pm
- Location: United States
RE: Two questions about a West Coast invasion
ORIGINAL: Lokasenna
ORIGINAL: HansBolter
Come on guys, you're grasping at straws.
The ship availability interface is a report interface that is independent of the map.
It doesn't tell you ships are building at a given location it tells you the ARRIVE at that locations.
Yes, perhaps the asterisk does have the meaning Lowpe speculates, but like much of the appendage documentation where the heck is it ever explained.
So, yea, you've made the point that if a player goes digging deeply enough into the data base they CAN glean the fact the ships are being built at these shipyards that are invisible on the map.
However, none of that satisfies my point that a GRAPHIC ON THE MAP is what is needed to give the player a proper heads up regarding his assets and the need to protect them.
Its a huge design shortfall.
I'm a designer. Its what I do for a living. Trust me to know when a design falls short of the mark.
Hans, by your logic, everything is independent of the map. Everything non-map is somehow a strawman argument... [8|]
The map doesn't tell you whether or not your bombers at that base (which you may not be able to see if you have too many groups there, because the mouse-over on the map is limited) are at a large enough airfield to fly at their normal ranges/payloads. It doesn't tell you whether or not you have torpedoes. It doesn't tell you whether or not the airfield is overstacked.
The map doesn't tell you if your TFs have fuel.
The map doesn't tell you how far that CV TF that you detected can move and then strike at you.
You need to open up other screens for all of these things,
I could go on and on and on and on and on...
The point I am endeavoring to make and you are doing everything you can to avoid acknowledging is that an icon on the map with information about what is building in that shipyard would have gone a long way toward giving players a heads heads up about an asset that needs protecting.
The map gives me a heads up that there are aircraft factories at a given locale that needs protecting, but completely ignores alerting me to the presence of the construction shipyard.
How can anyone with functional gray matter between their ears fail to see that the presence of the icon would have been helpful?
How can you keep arguing against this?
Hans
RE: Two questions about a West Coast invasion
ORIGINAL: HansBolter
The point I am endeavoring to make and you are doing everything you can to avoid acknowledging is that an icon on the map with information about what is building in that shipyard would have gone a long way toward giving players a heads heads up about an asset that needs protecting.
The map gives me a heads up that there are aircraft factories at a given locale that needs protecting, but completely ignores alerting me to the presence of the construction shipyard.
How can anyone with functional gray matter between their ears fail to see that the presence of the icon would have been helpful?
How can you keep arguing against this?
I'm not avoiding it.
How can you, a self-proclaimed designer, not understand that what you're suggesting is:
1) Not possible to the degree you're suggesting it
2) Even if it were just the addition of a line on the base information mouse-over ("Ships arriving from queue: 210"), that would be a) atypical and b) where the hell do you draw the line at that point? The mouse-over can't display everything.
I'm not arguing that it wouldn't be helpful. I'm arguing that it's not necessary and is not practical, from a design perspective.
You see, I've done plenty of UI and game design, too, and I still do information visualization. What kind of designer are you again? You didn't specify in your previous post.
My gray matter functions perfectly fine, thank you. I don't really need to ask how you can continue to belabor this point - everything about your objections screams that your response is more emotional than rational, and tied to feelings of "JAPAN BAD AND JAPAN PLAYERS WHINE A BUNCH."
Which is fine, you're allowed to do that. But don't pretend that your arguments aren't asinine, please.
RE: Two questions about a West Coast invasion
The US Army plan[ AR 380-5 Feb 26th, 1938] for defending the Columbia river:
. [1] From the standpoint of national defense the importance of the Columbia River lies in it's possible use as a route of access to the important north and south roads and the railroads in the vicinity of Longview Washington, approximately 50 nautical miles from the mouth of the river. With the exception of Astoria Oregon, the cities of importance are so far inland that they can be subjected to naval attack only after the enemy has proceeded well up the river. The water off Astoria would be of much value as an anchorage for enemy vessels during some of the heavy storms of frequent occurrance during the winter months.
[2] An approved project provides for the maintenance of a 35-foot channel 500 feet wide from the mouth of the Columbia River to Portland Oregon. While this will permit navigation of the river by almost all classes of ships, they will compelled to move at a comparatively slow speed, and there will be practically no maneuver room. Ships proceeding up the river would be vulnerable to the fire of the railway or tractor drawn artillery on the railway and highway on the south bank of the river. Ships would have to proceed in column and once committed it would be impossible for large ships to turn until one of the turning basins in the river was reached. The threat to enemy ships is so great that it appears improbable that it will ever be undertaken.
c. A controlled mine field is provided for the mouth of the river. As long as this is maintained enemy ships can be denied entrance to the river. This minefield is covered by three batteries, Allen, Pratt and Murphy, each of two 6-inch guns.
5. UNDERWATER DEFENSE.
seven groups of controlled mines.
two fixed listening posts
In mid december [17th] 1941 there are some changes, there are 3 lines of controlled mines[ 156 mines, these are Army mines, they are maintained by Army boats] across the Columbia, not 7 groups. Defense command did not even entertain the notion that an enemy could get to Portland, they didn't think it was probable to get to Longview. In mid december 1941, the Army took AA troops from the Atlantic area and moved them to the Pacific theater to man AA units. Portland was one of first 4 to get AA. The Army did consider it possible that a TF could approach the coast under cover of storms and launch a air attack on Portland. There were no railway guns available for the defense of the Columbia. There were also 2 Eng Bn's [29th & 30th; actually companies] in Portland. There were by Jan 42' 2000 militia in Portland and 500+] in Astoria and 300+ in Longview
. [1] From the standpoint of national defense the importance of the Columbia River lies in it's possible use as a route of access to the important north and south roads and the railroads in the vicinity of Longview Washington, approximately 50 nautical miles from the mouth of the river. With the exception of Astoria Oregon, the cities of importance are so far inland that they can be subjected to naval attack only after the enemy has proceeded well up the river. The water off Astoria would be of much value as an anchorage for enemy vessels during some of the heavy storms of frequent occurrance during the winter months.
[2] An approved project provides for the maintenance of a 35-foot channel 500 feet wide from the mouth of the Columbia River to Portland Oregon. While this will permit navigation of the river by almost all classes of ships, they will compelled to move at a comparatively slow speed, and there will be practically no maneuver room. Ships proceeding up the river would be vulnerable to the fire of the railway or tractor drawn artillery on the railway and highway on the south bank of the river. Ships would have to proceed in column and once committed it would be impossible for large ships to turn until one of the turning basins in the river was reached. The threat to enemy ships is so great that it appears improbable that it will ever be undertaken.
c. A controlled mine field is provided for the mouth of the river. As long as this is maintained enemy ships can be denied entrance to the river. This minefield is covered by three batteries, Allen, Pratt and Murphy, each of two 6-inch guns.
5. UNDERWATER DEFENSE.
seven groups of controlled mines.
two fixed listening posts
In mid december [17th] 1941 there are some changes, there are 3 lines of controlled mines[ 156 mines, these are Army mines, they are maintained by Army boats] across the Columbia, not 7 groups. Defense command did not even entertain the notion that an enemy could get to Portland, they didn't think it was probable to get to Longview. In mid december 1941, the Army took AA troops from the Atlantic area and moved them to the Pacific theater to man AA units. Portland was one of first 4 to get AA. The Army did consider it possible that a TF could approach the coast under cover of storms and launch a air attack on Portland. There were no railway guns available for the defense of the Columbia. There were also 2 Eng Bn's [29th & 30th; actually companies] in Portland. There were by Jan 42' 2000 militia in Portland and 500+] in Astoria and 300+ in Longview
"After eight years as President I have only two regrets: that I have not shot Henry Clay or hanged John C. Calhoun."--1837
RE: Two questions about a West Coast invasion
Very rationale, and Which the OP failed to do ... [;)]ORIGINAL: Bearcat2
In mid december [17th] 1941 there are some changes, there are 3 lines of controlled mines[ 156 mines, these are Army mines, they are maintained by Army boats] across the Columbia, not 7 groups. Defense command did not even entertain the notion that an enemy could get to Portland, they didn't think it was probable to get to Longview. In mid december 1941, the Army took AA troops from the Atlantic area and moved them to the Pacific theater to man AA units. Portland was one of first 4 to get AA. The Army did consider it possible that a TF could approach the coast under cover of storms and launch a air attack on Portland. There were no railway guns available for the defense of the Columbia. There were also 2 Eng Bn's [29th & 30th; actually companies] in Portland. There were by Jan 42' 2000 militia in Portland and 500+] in Astoria and 300+ in Longview
Pax
RE: Two questions about a West Coast invasion
I know the few times I have played the Allies I always garrison west coast bases with AA pronto and base some fighters up and down the coast.
Given Portland's industry they always would get a fair chunk of aerial defenses, plus it has to be in the top ten of naval repair yards the Allies have...meaning it might have some naval squads there and be converting/repairing ships.
However, my biggest fear is a naval air attack on the Warspite/Colorado in drydock...so there are pickets and naval search a plenty up in this neck of the woods.
Given Portland's industry they always would get a fair chunk of aerial defenses, plus it has to be in the top ten of naval repair yards the Allies have...meaning it might have some naval squads there and be converting/repairing ships.
However, my biggest fear is a naval air attack on the Warspite/Colorado in drydock...so there are pickets and naval search a plenty up in this neck of the woods.
-
anarchyintheuk
- Posts: 3958
- Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 7:08 pm
- Location: Dallas
RE: Two questions about a West Coast invasion
ORIGINAL: PaxMondo
Very rationale, and Which the OP failed to do ... [;)]ORIGINAL: Bearcat2
In mid december [17th] 1941 there are some changes, there are 3 lines of controlled mines[ 156 mines, these are Army mines, they are maintained by Army boats] across the Columbia, not 7 groups. Defense command did not even entertain the notion that an enemy could get to Portland, they didn't think it was probable to get to Longview. In mid december 1941, the Army took AA troops from the Atlantic area and moved them to the Pacific theater to man AA units. Portland was one of first 4 to get AA. The Army did consider it possible that a TF could approach the coast under cover of storms and launch a air attack on Portland. There were no railway guns available for the defense of the Columbia. There were also 2 Eng Bn's [29th & 30th; actually companies] in Portland. There were by Jan 42' 2000 militia in Portland and 500+] in Astoria and 300+ in Longview
The OP had a base force in Portland. I don't recall the number of personnel in a base force but active duty forces would be more effective than the 2k militia mentioned above.
RE: Two questions about a West Coast invasion
The only saving grace to this is that it wasnt a "commando" raid on Portland.
2+ Divisions is a sizable attack and is probably there for a substantial stay.
Its a JFB taking full advantage of knowing exactly how the AFB economy works and sending forces to take them out, keep your eyes open for more attacks on vital points.
2+ Divisions is a sizable attack and is probably there for a substantial stay.
Its a JFB taking full advantage of knowing exactly how the AFB economy works and sending forces to take them out, keep your eyes open for more attacks on vital points.
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
RE: Two questions about a West Coast invasion
ORIGINAL: ny59giants_MatrixForum
It's the Allied turn, so I'll treat it like turn 2 and go through the whole map. [X(]
Lot's of stuff to do...click, click, click, etc.
edit: Nevermind.
RE: Two questions about a West Coast invasion
Last time I checked the US has enough forces to protect the major coastal cities and the Canadians can also help they have bomber and search assets which can look out for invasions. At least the Seattle area can be covered only using Canadian planes. That should leave enough for good cover for the rest of the west coast.
Here an idea lets just give the US 30 more Catalinas at the beginning and 3 more armor divisions as fire brigade...[8|]
Here an idea lets just give the US 30 more Catalinas at the beginning and 3 more armor divisions as fire brigade...[8|]
RE: Two questions about a West Coast invasion
West Coast can be reasonabily well defended since january 1942. A good handle of the assets can make an USA invasion very difficult. 1 division per city plus 1 inf regt in coastal minor citys and end of the threat. The 7th Div which protects SF can be used as fire brigade too as it's armored and it make an initial assault VERY rough.
Obviously the allied must devote part of 8th December turn in turning ON all forts at WC/CDN
Obviously the allied must devote part of 8th December turn in turning ON all forts at WC/CDN
RE: Two questions about a West Coast invasion
ORIGINAL: traskott
West Coast can be reasonabily well defended since january 1942. A good handle of the assets can make an USA invasion very difficult. 1 division per city plus 1 inf regt in coastal minor citys and end of the threat. The 7th Div which protects SF can be used as fire brigade too as it's armored and it make an initial assault VERY rough.
Obviously the allied must devote part of 8th December turn in turning ON all forts at WC/CDN
I even turn forts on vs. the AI, the US has enough supplies (and fuel), even in my scen27 where I reduced the levels a bit. I never felt any lack of supplies or fuel nonetheless. (needs further reduction obviously as most know the early war allied supply problems do not exist in game). But I have never heard of the AI doing that move, I would be more careful in a PBM obviously
I was kind of surprised that also so many tankers appear at Portland - I knew the CVE buildings there of course.
RE: Two questions about a West Coast invasion
In real life 40,000 Japanese soldiers cannot stand in the way of US Army wanting to take Portland back. So Portland shipbuilding facilities should survive after the IJA got wipe out.
Banner designed by rogueusmc
RE: Two questions about a West Coast invasion
Just throw a Donner Party for the invaders and everything will be mental as anything.
RE: Two questions about a West Coast invasion
ORIGINAL: patrickl
In real life 40,000 Japanese soldiers cannot stand in the way of US Army wanting to take Portland back. So Portland shipbuilding facilities should survive after the IJA got wipe out.
Except for the whole sabotage thing they could do.
RE: Two questions about a West Coast invasion
They could at least blow up all the facilities. How long to recover? Wow!ORIGINAL: Lokasenna
ORIGINAL: patrickl
In real life 40,000 Japanese soldiers cannot stand in the way of US Army wanting to take Portland back. So Portland shipbuilding facilities should survive after the IJA got wipe out.
Except for the whole sabotage thing they could do.
Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home
RE: Two questions about a West Coast invasion
Silly that taking out Portland for one day, in Jan '42, somehow "kills" all the CVE's and tankers for the rest of the war.
As if the US couldn't build these ships elsewhere, as if they were planned to be built on Jan 1 '42. Like we'd be building liberty ships at 1x per hour (or whatever) in the Gulf coast.
Or "omg, Portland got invaded in Jan 1942, I guess that means we can't build a B17s in, idk, Omaha, or anywhere else. Them damn sneaky Japs ruining our unbuilt airplane factories!!!"
It's just a silly design decision. I'd say at best, give all those ships and planes a 1 month delay and have them come in on the East Coast.
Going for the West Coast on a "raid and destroy" mission is akin to loading up all the troops and making a beeline for Nomuea in the first week of game of UV.
As if the US couldn't build these ships elsewhere, as if they were planned to be built on Jan 1 '42. Like we'd be building liberty ships at 1x per hour (or whatever) in the Gulf coast.
Or "omg, Portland got invaded in Jan 1942, I guess that means we can't build a B17s in, idk, Omaha, or anywhere else. Them damn sneaky Japs ruining our unbuilt airplane factories!!!"
It's just a silly design decision. I'd say at best, give all those ships and planes a 1 month delay and have them come in on the East Coast.
Going for the West Coast on a "raid and destroy" mission is akin to loading up all the troops and making a beeline for Nomuea in the first week of game of UV.