Gensui jdsrae (J) vs SolInvictus (A). IJ War Council room

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

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

User avatar
Anachro
Posts: 2506
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 4:51 pm
Location: The Coastal Elite

RE: 18 Feb 42 report

Post by Anachro »

ORIGINAL: rustysi

Just another FYI.

If your opponent is aware of it he can go a long way to defeating your attempted points win just by using his many engineers to increase his base sizes. All those points will add up, and you'll need three or four to overcome each one.

+1 Should be standard practice for every Allied player from Day 1. Upgrade, upgrade, upgrade. I build out every airfield and port I possible can on the west coast just for the VP gain! Then I build up some backwater places as well on the main map. It makes no sense not to given how supply is free for the Allies, esp on the mainland.
"Now excuse me while I go polish my balls ..." - BBfanboy
User avatar
jdsrae
Posts: 2796
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2010 6:58 am
Location: Gandangara Country

RE: 18 Feb 42 report

Post by jdsrae »

Best to keep engineers busy building stuff and not sitting around idle on South Pacific islands...
Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655
User avatar
PaxMondo
Posts: 10847
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:23 pm

RE: 18 Feb 42 report

Post by PaxMondo »

ORIGINAL: jdsrae

Best to keep engineers busy building stuff and not sitting around idle on South Pacific islands...
Yes, but remember it all costs supply which is a finite resource. so don't build anything that you don't need. Over building wastes supply.
Pax
User avatar
jdsrae
Posts: 2796
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2010 6:58 am
Location: Gandangara Country

RE: 18 Feb 42 report

Post by jdsrae »

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo
ORIGINAL: jdsrae

Best to keep engineers busy building stuff and not sitting around idle on South Pacific islands...
Yes, but remember it all costs supply which is a finite resource. so don't build anything that you don't need. Over building wastes supply.

Sorry Pax I was referring to real life!
As an IJA Gensui I will not be allocating supply to build resorts on Pacific Islands!

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655
User avatar
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: 18 Feb 42 report

Post by obvert »

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: obvert
ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

The fundamental problem with Judy is range, until the D4Y4 and Grace. It gives the allies a real advantage in a CV fight, one that almost always turns out costly for the IJ.

For me, after Oct '42, I really don't want a CV duel as IJ. I want to fight allied CV's with LBA using KB as bait. The KB is very brittle, I've lost so many CV's to a single hit.

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

SBD-5 is 9 hex with 1000lb, SBD-6 is 10 hex. AND their fighters have better range than the A7M … after 10/42 you are fighting with a range DISADVANTAGE, which mean they can hit you and you cannot retaliate. THat is the scenario you enjoy right now until 10/42.

Not sure what you mean here Pax. CV battles are limited regardless of airframe range, right? Allies to 7 hexes and IJ to 8 hexes. So range is not so important as long as planes can cary their biggest bomb to those ranges, and the Judy can with drop tanks.

No, there are always probabilities for longer range IF the aircraft are capable. There was a dev discussion way, way back about this. You can have combat at up to 10 hex, but probabilities are low. DL has a lot to do with it, other factors as well. The discussion was triggered IIRC, but a 9 hex strike ….

If there are probabilities they certainly haven't been shown in AARs I've read or in games I've played. Has this ever happened with you?

I've made numerous 8 hex strikes as Japan, completely confident (and as it turned out rightly so) that the Allies could not respond. Jockmeister was particularly upset by this feature, and I've heard other Allied players rail against it too. So until shown otherwise I will take the 7 hex Allied and 8 hex IJN as solid and predictable range lints to act upon.

Now, reaction can move Allied CVs closer, but many Allied commanders do not use reaction as it also threatens to break up the DS and fragment CV strikes. I've definitely seen that happen too.

If you find a link to that discussion (or if Alfred can be summoned for his extensive knowledge and magical ability to find the exact thread referenced) then maybe I'll have to reconsider. [;)]
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
User avatar
Anachro
Posts: 2506
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 4:51 pm
Location: The Coastal Elite

RE: 18 Feb 42 report

Post by Anachro »

@Obvert You can read the relevant discussion here: Strike range for CV AC LINK

Relevant quotes from michaelm75au provided. This discussion is all new to me as well (though I feel like I've had strikes beyond 7 hexes before and this thread confirms it might be possible).
ORIGINAL: michaelm75au

There are a few items that are in the original WITP that were carried over and not changed apart from the map scale:
1. There is code that limits the strike range to that flown in 6 hours (based on cruise speed).
2. Limits carrier launched strikes to 7 and 8 respectively for Allied and Japanese.

These limits are used when deciding the best TF to attack.
ORIGINAL: michaelm75au

Good experience and morale can push the group's max range out a random one or two hex for an attack.
This means that sometimes an attack will take place slightly outside the expected range of the aircraft.

"Now excuse me while I go polish my balls ..." - BBfanboy
ITAKLinus
Posts: 662
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:56 pm
Location: Italy

RE: 18 Feb 42 report

Post by ITAKLinus »

Ok. Let's suppose it's in the way posted above, meaning that's possible to do strikes at a longer range we (me, Obvert and others) thought.


Is it a reliable thing? Is it somehow possible to force that to happen? I personally have never seen it happen. Maybe, I'm just unexperienced, but it can also be that it's something which simply doesn't happen anyhow often.

Personally, I'd never take it into account in my evaluations over embarked planes, doctrines, strategies and tactical setups.
Francesco
GetAssista
Posts: 2836
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 6:13 am

RE: 18 Feb 42 report

Post by GetAssista »

ORIGINAL: ITAKLinus
Is it a reliable thing? Is it somehow possible to force that to happen? I personally have never seen it happen. Maybe, I'm just unexperienced, but it can also be that it's something which simply doesn't happen anyhow often.
It is not a reliable thing at all. Assuming it is still there in the last patch/beta, which I doubt
AI players like me can attest to it with more confidence than PBEM guys because we usually run around with very experienced and morally sound CV force sinking hapless AI left and right. If overly long CV strikes exist with some non-trivial probability they are bound to happen now and then when you have 6+ individual strikes a turn for several turns running around a mass of AI ships lighted up by LBA. I've never seen those in the recent years of me playing AI (including no-fog-of-war games)
User avatar
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: 18 Feb 42 report

Post by obvert »

ORIGINAL: Anachro

@Obvert You can read the relevant discussion here: Strike range for CV AC LINK

Relevant quotes from michaelm75au provided. This discussion is all new to me as well (though I feel like I've had strikes beyond 7 hexes before and this thread confirms it might be possible).
ORIGINAL: michaelm75au

There are a few items that are in the original WITP that were carried over and not changed apart from the map scale:
1. There is code that limits the strike range to that flown in 6 hours (based on cruise speed).
2. Limits carrier launched strikes to 7 and 8 respectively for Allied and Japanese.

These limits are used when deciding the best TF to attack.
ORIGINAL: michaelm75au

Good experience and morale can push the group's max range out a random one or two hex for an attack.
This means that sometimes an attack will take place slightly outside the expected range of the aircraft.


Awesome. Thanks for the link!

As I've already mentioned, this will be a VERY rare occurrence if it ever happens at all to you. I am about to test the A6M models and I can put this factor into the calculations as well. I'll be shocked after 20 iterations if even one strike goes beyond the CV strike limits. I've definitely done more than 20 myself at 8 hex range and never had it happen, but maybe that's also because I don't set planes beyond that limit due to torpedo ranges and escort ranges. So I'll try.

The Allies have certainly never hit me (and when I've played them I've never hit) beyond 7 hexes.

Testing is the only way to be sure though, so I'll give it a shot soon. [;)]
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
User avatar
Anachro
Posts: 2506
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2015 4:51 pm
Location: The Coastal Elite

RE: 18 Feb 42 report

Post by Anachro »

The other issue I have for this is the matter coordination. Does this mean individual air groups might split off from the coordinated strike and hit father? Is it instead a calculation based on the morale/experience of the full coordinated strike? Etc. I wouldn't want piecemeal bomber groups, experienced at that, going off farther than everyone else and dying to enemy CAP.
"Now excuse me while I go polish my balls ..." - BBfanboy
User avatar
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: 18 Feb 42 report

Post by obvert »

ORIGINAL: Anachro

The other issue I have for this is the matter coordination. Does this mean individual air groups might split off from the coordinated strike and hit father? Is it instead a calculation based on the morale/experience of the full coordinated strike? Etc. I wouldn't want piecemeal bomber groups, experienced at that, going off farther than everyone else and dying to enemy CAP.

Well, as stated it looks like group experience would control that group, so yes, coordination.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
User avatar
Hanzberger
Posts: 925
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 12:16 pm
Location: SE Pennsylvania
Contact:

RE: 18 Feb 42 report

Post by Hanzberger »

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: jdsrae

Best to keep engineers busy building stuff and not sitting around idle on South Pacific islands...
Yes, but remember it all costs supply which is a finite resource. so don't build anything that you don't need. Over building wastes supply.
What is your supply level looking like at this point? I'm glad Pax mentioned this, something I need to revisit in my current AI game. How far down do you guys go with supply before pulling back on the stick? (In Japan) I'm currently down to 500k 2/19/42.
Playing Scen 2 vs Ai currently

Japan AC wire chart here
tm.asp?m=2769286&mpage=1&key=?
User avatar
jdsrae
Posts: 2796
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2010 6:58 am
Location: Gandangara Country

RE: 18 Feb 42 report

Post by jdsrae »

Sounds similar to my game now.
I haven’t had 500k supply at Tokyo since about 8 Dec 42!
I bottomed it out at about 120k at Tokyo by about Christmas 42 and it’s been rising since.
Up to the dizzy heights of about 160k now. Plenty of cities have 15-20k in them so probably close to 500k all up in Japan.
Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655
ITAKLinus
Posts: 662
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2018 2:56 pm
Location: Italy

RE: 18 Feb 42 report

Post by ITAKLinus »

There is a misunderstanding maybe: are we talking about the supply level in Tokio or the supply level for Japan as a whole?


With 500k as a whole I think I'd have to stop operating in maximum a couple of turns.


If they are in Onshu... Well, not a big problem even going much lower than that: it's supplies distribution across the map which matters at the beginning. Having 4M in Tokio doesn't really matter if you then do not have sufficien supplies to your frontline units. And having a "dispersed" stock is quite useful until the mid-game because of the more efficient logistics of such an approach.
Francesco
User avatar
jdsrae
Posts: 2796
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2010 6:58 am
Location: Gandangara Country

RE: 18 Feb 42 report

Post by jdsrae »

ORIGINAL: ITAKLinus

There is a misunderstanding maybe: are we talking about the supply level in Tokio or the supply level for Japan as a whole?


With 500k as a whole I think I'd have to stop operating in maximum a couple of turns.


If they are in Onshu... Well, not a big problem even going much lower than that: it's supplies distribution across the map which matters at the beginning. Having 4M in Tokio doesn't really matter if you then do not have sufficien supplies to your frontline units. And having a "dispersed" stock is quite useful until the mid-game because of the more efficient logistics of such an approach.

I’m not sure exactly how much supply I have in Japan (excluding Hokkaido) as I don’t use tracker. I’d have to manually add the supply to find out and I’m not doing that!
I’ve been prioritising industry repair until recently with relatively little supply exported to support operations yet, so keeping >10k supply at many cities, usually 15-20k to help ensure industry repair isn’t stunted by lack of supply in hex.
I have never had a yellow or red warning mark in Japan and supply is growing in Tokyo which is the “indicator city” for this economic zone.

With supply use for industry expansion calming down (for now) I am about to start exporting some supply to China and Burma to support operations.

Manila still has a decent supply stockpile of about 80k that I am going to send to a few places like Miri for oil repair, Java to support its capture and PNG to support 14th Army ops there.

My luck with capturing industry intact just ran out at Sian. All industry was completely zeroed. Bummer because I could definitely have used the extra supply that an undamaged Sian would have produced. Ah well, I’ve had a good run with those random die rolls so far.
Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655
User avatar
Hanzberger
Posts: 925
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 12:16 pm
Location: SE Pennsylvania
Contact:

RE: 18 Feb 42 report

Post by Hanzberger »

I thought expanding and repairing of industry for Japan was a player No No.
Playing Scen 2 vs Ai currently

Japan AC wire chart here
tm.asp?m=2769286&mpage=1&key=?
User avatar
jdsrae
Posts: 2796
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2010 6:58 am
Location: Gandangara Country

RE: 18 Feb 42 report

Post by jdsrae »

ORIGINAL: Hanzberger

I thought expanding and repairing of industry for Japan was a player No No.

Hi Hanz, I probably use the word “industry” too broadly, for everything from LI/HI to all forms of war machine production.

I am not expanding HI or LI as I don’t believe the return on investment is worth it. I am also not repairing any HI/LI or refineries that are captured damaged.
Some have different opinions, but to me expanding HI/LI would take supply out of the early years, when I have higher priorities for it, with a vague promise of future returns that probably won’t change the outcome anyway.

To clarify, I’ve spent a lot of supply setting up engine and aircraft factories and now just need to expand a few of my main ones to meet demand over time.
That has come at the expense of moving oodles of supply to support early operations but the field armies are getting by so far, mostly on the local stockpiles that they started the war with.

Burma needs regular supply runs from now on though, as it doesn’t produce anywhere near enough to sustain an army there.
Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655
User avatar
castor troy
Posts: 14331
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:17 am
Location: Austria

RE: 18 Feb 42 report

Post by castor troy »

ORIGINAL: GetAssista
ORIGINAL: PaxMondo
ORIGINAL: obvert
Not sure what you mean here Pax. CV battles are limited regardless of airframe range, right? Allies to 7 hexes and IJ to 8 hexes. So range is not so important as long as planes can cary their biggest bomb to those ranges, and the Judy can with drop tanks.
No, there are always probabilities for longer range IF the aircraft are capable. There was a dev discussion way, way back about this. You can have combat at up to 10 hex, but probabilities are low. DL has a lot to do with it, other factors as well. The discussion was triggered IIRC, but a 9 hex strike ….
That would be new to me. And to Alfred too https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.a ... 38&mpage=1
ORIGINAL: Alfred
1. TF Reaction has nothing to do with plane operations. It deals only wih the movement of the ships in the TF itself.

2. Aircraft, whether land based or carrier based, will only launch a naval strike against enemy enemy task forces if the detection level is high enough and they fall within the range set for the aircraft unit.

3. There is a hard coded maximum limit at which carrier aircraft will launch; 7 hexes for the Allies, 8 hexes for Japan.

You should read pages 217-221 of the manual for how spotting works and how it operates.
Alfred


and this is where Alfred is once again wrong. Not sure why everyone thinks he would know all and everything. In my ongoing PBEM vs Mundy Kates from KB attacked from a range of 9 hexes in early 42. And I have seen enough AAR where the IJ player tried to stay 10 hexes from the enemy to fly strikes with Graces from that range. I've done the same. Never heard or seen evidence of CV strikes of 10+ hexes.
User avatar
PaxMondo
Posts: 10847
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:23 pm

RE: 18 Feb 42 report

Post by PaxMondo »

ORIGINAL: castor troy

ORIGINAL: GetAssista
ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

No, there are always probabilities for longer range IF the aircraft are capable. There was a dev discussion way, way back about this. You can have combat at up to 10 hex, but probabilities are low. DL has a lot to do with it, other factors as well. The discussion was triggered IIRC, but a 9 hex strike ….
That would be new to me. And to Alfred too https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.a ... 38&mpage=1
ORIGINAL: Alfred
1. TF Reaction has nothing to do with plane operations. It deals only wih the movement of the ships in the TF itself.

2. Aircraft, whether land based or carrier based, will only launch a naval strike against enemy enemy task forces if the detection level is high enough and they fall within the range set for the aircraft unit.

3. There is a hard coded maximum limit at which carrier aircraft will launch; 7 hexes for the Allies, 8 hexes for Japan.

You should read pages 217-221 of the manual for how spotting works and how it operates.
Alfred


and this is where Alfred is once again wrong. Not sure why everyone thinks he would know all and everything. In my ongoing PBEM vs Mundy Kates from KB attacked from a range of 9 hexes in early 42. And I have seen enough AAR where the IJ player tried to stay 10 hexes from the enemy to fly strikes with Graces from that range. I've done the same. Never heard or seen evidence of CV strikes of 10+ hexes.
That was written quite some time ago … Alfred is looking into it to see when/if there was an update.

Like you, I am sure I have had launches at 9 hex and maybe 10 as well. Nothing beyond 10 though. I also recall a thread about it where it was all clarified. Hopefully Alfred will find it.
Pax
User avatar
jdsrae
Posts: 2796
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2010 6:58 am
Location: Gandangara Country

RE: 18 Feb 42 report

Post by jdsrae »

The game date has skipped ahead to 25 Feb, with Batavia captured. I had it surrounded so everything surrendered.
Industry was captured intact which I’m happy with as I need the local supply generation.
I won’t get any details up until the weekend, but the timer on the amphibious bonus is running out.
I’ll do a theatre by theatre run down after the 1 Mar turn, maybe next weekend, but here’s a summary from each.

Japan: supply is ticking up, a few major port expansions still going but no airfields yet. About 10 days until I have enough PP to buy out 53rd Div.

Manchukuo: garrison is at 8100/8000. 14th/B Div is next to move forward once it gets to about 8200/8000
China: Supply has reached Sian where the victors are having a few days of leave. A few Chinese units are moving to try and flank but I have some small units along the main routes to keep the supply lines open. Forces are closing together for a large assault river crossing SW of Changsha. In the mountains, Kunming is still mine and he airfield damage is down into the 50s. Once it drops <50 I should be able to fly in non-para reinforcements.

Burma: 54th Div and support captures Akyab easily. 33, 55 and 56 Divs are pushing into central Burma.
Sumatra: only one coastal town left with 5th Div RCTs closing overland.
Java: Batavia captured. 4th Div is already at Tjilitjap with the main body to move towards it and on to Soerabaja.
Borneo: clear apart from allied stragglers, with 5th Air Div units replacing IJNAF groups that will move to SEAF

Most of 14th Army at Manila is on transports now moving to PNG. Southern Army reserves at Manila will move to either Java or south towards he Celebes and Timor.

PNG: Finschafen is captured with Zeros now flying local CAP while engineers expand the airfield. I’ve spotted allied movement from Port Moresby towards Kokoda/Buna. I will take Buna once I can fly LRCAP out of Lae to protect it, near the time that 14th Army comes ashore at Milne Bay and PM.
Solomons: no more expansion here yet with naval engineers concentrating on Rabaul and soon Lae airfield. the Allied CA task force had a go at Tulagi recently doing no damage and showing about 5CA 3CL to me. VADM Nagumo is planning a surprise meeting for mid March. I have a fair few subs in defensive patrols but no success yet. I expect Townsville and Noumea are the main allied bases for rearming CAs.
4th Fleet: the 6#th Naval Guard Units are nearing Truk. From there they will move forward on to scattered island garrison roles. The allied BB was spotted a few days in a row at Wake Island but now seems to have left.

NEAF/5th Fleet: the Kuriles have received a few 5#th Naval Garrison units but no push into the Aleutians yet.
Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”