Empire of the Sun - DesertWolf101 (J) vs Andy Mac (A)

[RangerJoe]

The P-40Es with drop tanks have the range to make it to China.

[DesertWolf101]

Allied Tanker Losses

The combination of the KB's strike in Australia and the Japanese operations in the SRA region has resulted in substantial Allied sealift losses thus far. The damage inflicted on tankers and replenishment vessels has been particularly notable. Overall at this point in the campaign, my opponent has lost what I believe to be 27 TKs and 4 AOs. All of these are of the medium to large sized variety.

I'm not sure how much this will hurt the Allies over the course of the year, but I hope it will go some way towards hindering their logistical buildup. Thoughts?

[DesertWolf101]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

The P-40Es with drop tanks have the range to make it to China.

Good to know. I haven't seen them there yet but I guess they could have also hopped on from there to India.

[Alamander]

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101


I will soon post the number of tanker kills achieved thus far in my campaign. What date have you reached thus far on yours?

I am in early-mid May, 1942. I am playing Mike McReary (formerly Wargamer), who is a veteran of many campaigns against NJP (twice), Mr. Kane (thrice), and Lowpe. After a few victories, he had a couple bad games, but he has really refined his tactics, applying many of the lessons learned in the games against Lowpe and Mr. Kane. I read his AARs and those of his opponents, and it seems to me that I am playing a different player than Lowpe or Mr. Kane did.

We are in mid-May. I have taken the whole DEI, Cocos Island, Malaysia, Burma and all of the Phillipines except Luzon and Cebu (where some SNLFs are now engaged). I moved very quickly from the DEI, basically sailing KB straight through the DEI to North Oz, taking all the coastal bases in N. Oz, Horn Island, and Moresby. Then I just kept sailing east, basically, taking Rabaul, the whole of the Solomons, New Caledonia, Fiji, Norfolk Island, and Raoul Island (off the coast of New Zealand). This was all accomplished before the end of the amphibious bonus. Things slowed down dramatically in April, but are picking back up again. After the amphib bonus expires, you will discover that Japan has very few amphibious-capable ships, until some of the xAKs can be converted to AKs... very important, especially the Kyushus.

He is pressing me to the limit in the air over Burma with large-scale fighter sweeps daily and massive bomber raids preventing much of my airfield construction. We are playing PDU:off, so at the moment, all I have are Zeros and Oscar Is, which limits my ability to do much more than Cap key bases and hold on. He discovered a TF of 2 AMCs and 3 TBs patrolling west of Perth trying to intercept convoys from Capetown to Perth, and my subs have been active in that area and south of New Zealand. More, I cannot say at the moment, but basically.. he knows that my subs are concentrated around the only 2 paths to Australia that remain under allied control: South of New Zealand and west of Perth.

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: Alamander

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101

I will soon post the number of tanker kills achieved thus far in my campaign. What date have you reached thus far on yours?

I am in early-mid May, 1942. I am playing Mike McReary (formerly Wargamer), who is a veteran of many campaigns against NJP (twice), Mr. Kane (thrice), and Lowpe. After a few victories, he had a couple bad games, but he has really refined his tactics, applying many of the lessons learned in the games against Lowpe and Mr. Kane. I read his AARs and those of his opponents, and it seems to me that I am playing a different player than Lowpe or Mr. Kane did.

We are in mid-May. I have taken the whole DEI, Cocos Island, Malaysia, Burma and all of the Phillipines except Luzon and Cebu (where some SNLFs are now engaged). I moved very quickly from the DEI, basically sailing KB straight through the DEI to North Oz, taking all the coastal bases in N. Oz, Horn Island, and Moresby. Then I just kept sailing east, basically, taking Rabaul, the whole of the Solomons, New Caledonia, Fiji, Norfolk Island, and Raoul Island (off the coast of New Zealand). This was all accomplished before the end of the amphibious bonus. Things slowed down dramatically in April, but are picking back up again. After the amphib bonus expires, you will discover that Japan has very few amphibious-capable ships, until some of the xAKs can be converted to AKs... very important, especially the Kyushus.

He is pressing me to the limit in the air over Burma with large-scale fighter sweeps daily and massive bomber raids preventing much of my airfield construction. We are playing PDU:off, so at the moment, all I have are Zeros and Oscar Is, which limits my ability to do much more than Cap key bases and hold on. He discovered a TF of 2 AMCs and 3 TBs patrolling west of Perth trying to intercept convoys from Capetown to Perth, and my subs have been active in that area and south of New Zealand. More, I cannot say at the moment, but basically.. he knows that my subs are concentrated around the only 2 paths to Australia that remain under allied control: South of New Zealand and west of Perth.

Lowpe can educate a lot of people in this game and get them to a higher level of play.

AMCs act like APs for invasions. It would be wise to use them for such tasks.

[Alamander]

It is a good idea to pay attention to your signal intelligence. Most people discount Japanese signal intelligence, but you receive enough to have a very good idea of your enemies convoy routes and where he is massing forces to begin his counter offensive.

You will even receive signal intelligence from off-map hexes from time-to-time, which can alert you that a convoy is inbound. Lowpe used signal intelligence to good effect in his game against Wargamer. I put a sub on the exact hex of a convoy out in the middle of the Indian Ocean doing the same, having tracked its movements all the way from Capetown... loose lips sink ships... in this case a fat AK laden with fuel.

[DesertWolf101]

ORIGINAL: Alamander

It is a good idea to pay attention to your signal intelligence. Most people discount Japanese signal intelligence, but you receive enough to have a very good idea of your enemies convoy routes and where he is massing forces to begin his counter offensive.

You will even receive signal intelligence from off-map hexes from time-to-time, which can alert you that a convoy is inbound. Lowpe used signal intelligence to good effect in his game against Wargamer. I put a sub on the exact hex of a convoy out in the middle of the Indian Ocean doing the same, having tracked its movements all the way from Capetown... loose lips sink ships... in this case a fat AK laden with fuel.

I agree - I have also used Japanese signals intelligence to good effect in my current campaign. I will detail that when I arrive at the relevant date.

[Alamander]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


Lowpe can educate a lot of people in this game and get them to a higher level of play.

AMCs act like APs for invasions. It would be wise to use them for such tasks.

Yes... but not quite. They have the unload rate of an AK, but the daily disruption rate aboard is 2 rather than 1 and the unload damage is 2 rather than 1, resulting in more disabled devices. So... yes they are better than xAKs and xAPs, but not as good as AKs.

[Alfred]

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101

Allied Tanker Losses

The combination of the KB's strike in Australia and the Japanese operations in the SRA region has resulted in substantial Allied sealift losses thus far. The damage inflicted on tankers and replenishment vessels has been particularly notable. Overall at this point in the campaign, my opponent has lost what I believe to be 27 TKs and 4 AOs. All of these are of the medium to large sized variety.

I'm not sure how much this will hurt the Allies over the course of the year, but I hope it will go some way towards hindering their logistical buildup. Thoughts?

It won't hinder at all the buildup, it just means it will have to be accomplished by the alternative means.

1. AE allows for general merchantmen to carry fuel in their cargo holds at the 50% rate. So the real world restriction of liquid carry to dedicated liquid holds doesn't exist.

2. The TK you have sunk are too large to dock at the small Allied ports which are the norm at this stage of the war. Hence in terms of getting fast turn arounds at this stage, use of the small xAKL and xAK even when only carrying 50% of capacity in fuel will be better than off shore unloading of the big tankers.

3. There is usually only a single opportunity to load up DEI oil/fuel using the small DEI TK and AO before Japanese forces are in position to close down this operation. That time is largely over by now and the valuable tankers should be out of danger by now. Unless of course your opponent is greedy.

4. The real buildup limitation, in addition to small port size, (and related spoilage limits), is the scarcity of Allied convoy escorts. As Pearl Harbor was not struck, The Allies have more available escorts than normal. Not only are the escorts undamaged, they don't have to be reserved for escorting the damaged capital ships back from Pearl to the West Coast shipyards. The question is whether your opponent is the usual trigger happy fellow who really can't see beyond just shooting up the enemy, or is primarily focussed on logistical and infrastructure considerations.


Yes the haulage of sunk Allied ships is good, just don't expect that it creates any real problems to a strong Allied player who is fully cognisant of game mechanics.

Alfred

[RangerJoe]

ORIGINAL: Alamander

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Lowpe can educate a lot of people in this game and get them to a higher level of play.

AMCs act like APs for invasions. It would be wise to use them for such tasks.

Yes... but not quite. They have the unload rate of an AK, but the daily disruption rate aboard is 2 rather than 1 and the unload damage is 2 rather than 1, resulting in more disabled devices. So... yes they are better than xAKs and xAPs, but not as good as AKs.

True, but they can also be used in Fast Transport convoys. They also have more firepower which helps against the land targets. Some of the can and do carry float planes.

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: Alfred


Yes the haulage of sunk Allied ships is good, just don't expect that it creates any real problems to a strong Allied player who is fully cognisant of game mechanics.

Alfred

I agree with Alfred about everything, except that not even a strong Allied player is needed, just average I think.

One can hope that the Allies are emboldened to use those slow battleships in 1942 which means they are easily sunk by torpedoes.

You may slow the Allied buildup in Oz, but I seriously doubt in a scenario 1 game you can take advantage of it unless you grab a few bases and look to grab 5K plus VP in a strategic bombing campaign...and force a major CV clash.

Oz lacks fuel, fighters, AA and ultimately supplies early on. But Oz is nigh on impossible to totally blockade. If you can entice the Allies to attempt a large scale re-supply you might be able to really deliver a hard blow against his carriers in 1942 if your intel is up to snuff and that would see you all the way to early 1944.

Make sure you don't give away Wake, Marcus, and other Pacific Islands on the cheap.

Good luck!

[RangerJoe]

Well, if he gets VPs for strategic bombing in Australia, that could also slow the build up if the opponent tries to rebuild things like aircraft factories.

[DesertWolf101]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: Alfred


Yes the haulage of sunk Allied ships is good, just don't expect that it creates any real problems to a strong Allied player who is fully cognisant of game mechanics.

Alfred

I agree with Alfred about everything, except that not even a strong Allied player is needed, just average I think.

One can hope that the Allies are emboldened to use those slow battleships in 1942 which means they are easily sunk by torpedoes.

You may slow the Allied buildup in Oz, but I seriously doubt in a scenario 1 game you can take advantage of it unless you grab a few bases and look to grab 5K plus VP in a strategic bombing campaign...and force a major CV clash.

Oz lacks fuel, fighters, AA and ultimately supplies early on. But Oz is nigh on impossible to totally blockade. If you can entice the Allies to attempt a large scale re-supply you might be able to really deliver a hard blow against his carriers in 1942 if your intel is up to snuff and that would see you all the way to early 1944.

Make sure you don't give away Wake, Marcus, and other Pacific Islands on the cheap.

Good luck!

Thanks Alfred + Lowpe, it looks like there is more work to be done.

Just on the escort issue however, and as specifically related to the logistics interdiction strategy, remember that the whole point of those is to protect the shipping against submarines and other raiders - thanks to the Australia operation, I have already destroyed far more shipping in this short timeframe than I would have likely ever destroyed with submarines over the span of a year against a competent player, which places me ahead of a scenario with damaged escorts at Pearl.

I may have considered a strategic bombing campaign but that is not an option due to our house rules which prevent that method until June 1943.

[Alamander]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


You may slow the Allied buildup in Oz, but I seriously doubt in a scenario 1 game you can take advantage of it unless you grab a few bases and look to grab 5K plus VP in a strategic bombing campaign...and force a major CV clash.



Good luck!

I don't want to speak for Desertwolf, but in my case, and I suspect in his, the idea is not to prevent the buildup in Oz, which is impossible long-term. It is to delay it and hamper it as long as possible. We are both playing for the long game, and we are both prohibited from strat bombing Oz for the time-being, which is the most obvious route to auto-victory for Japan. Therefore, the idea is to delay the allied advance long enough for the 1944 reinforcements to arrive and be deployed. The biggest threat to a Japanese long-game is a rapid allied advance in 1943 and early 1944, when there is just not enough material and men to cover the perimeter. We are both seeking a new solution to this problem, it seems. It will be interesting to see how it plays out and hopefully one of us will have success.

[DesertWolf101]

ORIGINAL: Alamander

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


You may slow the Allied buildup in Oz, but I seriously doubt in a scenario 1 game you can take advantage of it unless you grab a few bases and look to grab 5K plus VP in a strategic bombing campaign...and force a major CV clash.



Good luck!

I don't want to speak for Desertwolf, but in my case, and I suspect in his, the idea is not to prevent the buildup in Oz, which is impossible long-term. It is to delay it and hamper it as long as possible. We are both playing for the long game, and we are both prohibited from strat bombing Oz for the time-being, which is the most obvious route to auto-victory for Japan. Therefore, the idea is to delay the allied advance long enough for the 1944 reinforcements to arrive and be deployed. The biggest threat to a Japanese long-game is a rapid allied advance in 1943 and early 1944, when there is just not enough material and men to cover the perimeter. We are both seeking a new solution to this problem, it seems. It will be interesting to see how it plays out and hopefully one of us will have success.

Yes, our approach to the problem is not very similar but our long term goals are the same. I will certainly attempt to draw my opponent into an early decisive battle with the aim of crippling his will to fight, but I doubt that is a likely outcome so I have to think more longterm. The best chance I have then is to delay the Allied juggernaut as much as possible. There are certainly different ways of pursuing that, but the one I have outlined in this AAR is the one I am going for in this campaign.

Ultimately I think the issue that I will most struggle with is to find the balance in successfully delaying the Allies whilst making sure I don't overextend or expend too many resources to the task.

[Alamander]

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101


Yes, our approach to the problem is not very similar but our long term goals are the same. I will certainly attempt to draw my opponent into an early decisive battle with the aim of crippling his will to fight, but I doubt that is a likely outcome so I have to think more longterm. The best chance I have then is to delay the Allied juggernaut as much as possible. There are certainly different ways of pursuing that, but the one I have outlined in this AAR is the one I am going for in this campaign.

Ultimately I think the issue that I will most struggle with is to find the balance in successfully delaying the Allies whilst making sure I don't overextend or expend too many resources to the task.

If he is relunctant to deploy his CVs and fight, one way to take advantage of this is divide your CVs, and create little CVE TFs, easy on fuel, that appear at the fringes of search arcs from time to time, so that he does not get too much DL to realize it is nothing significant. Let him see KB everywhere. This tends to slow any allied movement and will help to disguise where the bulk of 1st airfleet is assembled (which may very well be in port drinking saki).

[DesertWolf101]

December 21, 1941

Java Sea

The last Allied ships to escape from Singapore, the British destroyers Jupiter and Isis, were torpedoed and sunk by Better bombers from Sinkawang.

The light and escort carriers Zuiho and Hosho advanced into the Java Sea and came under attack by enemy aircraft near Pontianak. The enemy failed to score any hits and 6 Hudsons and 8 Vildebeest bombers were shot down as a result.

Sumatra

Zero fighters shot down four Vildebeest torpedo bombers that were attacking my Naval Guard unit at Langsa.

Andaman Islands

Nell bombers sank an AKL off Port Blair.

China

34 Zeros swept over Changsha, encountering 17 Flying Tigers on CAP. 11 H81-A3 aircraft were shot down for no Japanese losses.

Japanese forces capture Chuhsien and Tsiaotso.

[DesertWolf101]

December 22, 1941

Submarines

Prowling between Hawaii and California, I-17 sights the heavy cruiser Louisville and launches 6 torpedoes at it. Two solid hits are registered, and the Lousiville sinks beneath the waves.

Malaya

Advancing Japanese troops take Kuala Lumpur.

Sumatra

29 Ki-43Ib fighters sweep over Palembang, engaging 19 Buffalo fighters. Three Oscars are lost for eight Buffalo fighters.

Borneo

Pontianak is captured.

China

Japanese tank regiments seize Chengchow as the Chinese abandon their positions and run for the forests and hills.

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101


Zero fighters shot down four Vildebeest torpedo bombers that were attacking my Naval Guard unit at Langsa.

34 Zeros swept over Changsha, encountering 17 Flying Tigers on CAP. 11 H81-A3 aircraft were shot down for no Japanese losses.

Well done on getting torpedoes forward.

The Vildebeest on ground attack tells you a fair bit about your opponent.

Nailing those Tigers early is very good!

You are doing very well, indeed!

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101

ORIGINAL: Alamander

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


You may slow the Allied buildup in Oz, but I seriously doubt in a scenario 1 game you can take advantage of it unless you grab a few bases and look to grab 5K plus VP in a strategic bombing campaign...and force a major CV clash.



Good luck!

I don't want to speak for Desertwolf, but in my case, and I suspect in his, the idea is not to prevent the buildup in Oz, which is impossible long-term. It is to delay it and hamper it as long as possible. We are both playing for the long game, and we are both prohibited from strat bombing Oz for the time-being, which is the most obvious route to auto-victory for Japan. Therefore, the idea is to delay the allied advance long enough for the 1944 reinforcements to arrive and be deployed. The biggest threat to a Japanese long-game is a rapid allied advance in 1943 and early 1944, when there is just not enough material and men to cover the perimeter. We are both seeking a new solution to this problem, it seems. It will be interesting to see how it plays out and hopefully one of us will have success.

Yes, our approach to the problem is not very similar but our long term goals are the same. I will certainly attempt to draw my opponent into an early decisive battle with the aim of crippling his will to fight, but I doubt that is a likely outcome so I have to think more longterm. The best chance I have then is to delay the Allied juggernaut as much as possible. There are certainly different ways of pursuing that, but the one I have outlined in this AAR is the one I am going for in this campaign.

Ultimately I think the issue that I will most struggle with is to find the balance in successfully delaying the Allies whilst making sure I don't overextend or expend too many resources to the task.

I don't mean to criticize the strategy, just merely point out that I don't think it will materially slow the Allies down that much as Oz is usually about the last place in the Allied buildup line. That is one reason why Allied offensives out of Darwin area into the SRA isn't very popular.

Indeed, the Allies get to pick their main axis of advance. It does help to kind of nudge the Allies into choosing a different axis of attack perhaps and that has value if the Allies bite.

Also, perhaps as a deception it might work very well too. In seeing this opening as an AFB, I might be persuaded that Japan will invade heavily into Oz. I might therefor neglect other areas, and plan to either counter the Oz thrust, or since this is a scenario 1 game, I would be more likely to start smallish offensives elsewhere into Burma, or Santa Cruz/Guadalcanal, Marshalls, Aleutians, etc. I might very well risk my Carriers in support of those operations, especially if I consistently spotted enemy carriers around Oz. The more Japanese troops I could suck into Oz, the happier I would be as an AFB as long as AV wasn't in play.

Just random thoughts and I am looking forward to see how this plays out.[:)]