Hell Hath Frozen Over (Scout1 (J) vs Lowpe (A)

[DesertWolf101]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101

ORIGINAL: Lowpe



+1![&o]


Big believer in low threat tolerance setting. I plan on making liberal use of "low" threat tolerance, especially in the early days when most night experience is in the 30s and 40s.

I have played around with creating training task forces, with a high leadership task force commander to increase experience gain, patrol orders, but without combat it seems not much more effective than just creating a task force and letting it sit in a hex.

I am looking to prioritize gaining night experience, so my primary SAG usage will be with that in mind, looking to ambush convoys, night bombardments (which isn't nearly as effective as surface combat in raising experience), and if I find IJN SAG I hope the low threat tolerance will cause them to runaway very quickly, and not get into drawn out slugfests where the IJN enjoys a 30 point experience advantage.

Extreme care will be taken with the Iboat horde around Pearl. The best ASW ship at Pearl is the long legged Taney. But her experience at night is in the 20's!. We have got some serious training to do to get these rookies up to speed.

Couple of questions -

Would the low threat tolerance really help Force Z avoid the KB when the KB threat would be through its air strikes? Maybe I am mistaken, but I thought routing control was the setting that dealt with avoidance of air threats.

If you create an SAG and dock it (so it doesn't waste fuel), does it still gain experience or does it need to be undocked?

Thanks!

The routing setting deals with the movement path.

Alfred

Ha, I keep missing your latests posts. So routing settings is purely just about movement and is not affected by perceived or actual enemy threats. Is that correct?

[Alfred]

NO, perceived threats are taken into account. It is just that, as the Sargeant used to say at the end of the morning briefing in Hill Street Blues, be careful out there it's dangerous.[:)]

Routing through enemy minefields, narrow straits with enemy coastal gun emplacements and known enemy TF (surface and sub-surface) locations are also rather dangerous. The setting provides guidance, but again subject to the TF leader traits, as to how much risk to expose himself in the transit.

The threat level is instead about decline/accept combat. Best way to decline combat is to not be present at the scene.

Alfred

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

The threat tolerance level doesn't really apply to deciding to attempt to decline battle when TFs bump into each other. Then the TF leader traits are the main factor in play in assessing the known relevant data to decide whether to decline or accept combat.

So, I have been using it incorrectly, but getting the results I wanted for years because I generally liked to select lower aggression IJN Naval commanders. Too funny. [:D] I am sure this isn't the only instance either.

[DesertWolf101]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

NO, perceived threats are taken into account. It is just that, as the Sargeant used to say at the end of the morning briefing in Hill Street Blues, be careful out there it's dangerous.[:)]

Routing through enemy minefields, narrow straits with enemy coastal gun emplacements and known enemy TF (surface and sub-surface) locations are also rather dangerous. The setting provides guidance, but again subject to the TF leader traits, as to how much risk to expose himself in the transit.

The threat level is instead about decline/accept combat. Best way to decline combat is to not be present at the scene.

Alfred

Ahh I see. Thank you Alfred [:)]

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Perhaps one of the more frustrating challenges an AFB player faces, is understanding devices and which pool they pull from.

US supplied Chinese Infantry units pull from different pools...American 40mm Bofors (not the Chinese pool with pitiful production), but they pull from Chinese pools for the 105mm artillery gun.

Interesting to note that the American 40mm Bofors is more accurate than the Chinese Bofors.

It took me using tracker to discover this, otherwise it would be hard to pull that data from the game itself sans using the editor.

Or is there an method in the game to figure it out? Anyone know?

Yes.

Use the nationality filters on the devices pools screen.

Alfred

I never sorted this by name before, I simply stopped reading when I discovered the first device type I was looking for. Bad assumption. Many thanks, this will save time.[&o]

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101

ORIGINAL: Lowpe



+1![&o]


Big believer in low threat tolerance setting. I plan on making liberal use of "low" threat tolerance, especially in the early days when most night experience is in the 30s and 40s.

I have played around with creating training task forces, with a high leadership task force commander to increase experience gain, patrol orders, but without combat it seems not much more effective than just creating a task force and letting it sit in a hex.

I am looking to prioritize gaining night experience, so my primary SAG usage will be with that in mind, looking to ambush convoys, night bombardments (which isn't nearly as effective as surface combat in raising experience), and if I find IJN SAG I hope the low threat tolerance will cause them to runaway very quickly, and not get into drawn out slugfests where the IJN enjoys a 30 point experience advantage.

Extreme care will be taken with the Iboat horde around Pearl. The best ASW ship at Pearl is the long legged Taney. But her experience at night is in the 20's!. We have got some serious training to do to get these rookies up to speed.

Couple of questions -

Would the low threat tolerance really help Force Z avoid the KB when the KB threat would be through its air strikes? Maybe I am mistaken, but I thought routing control was the setting that dealt with avoidance of air threats.

If you create an SAG and dock it (so it doesn't waste fuel), does it still gain experience or does it need to be undocked?

Thanks!

The routing setting deals with the movement path.

Alfred

+1

If you change the routing settings and destinations, you can see how the local Commander will alter his route for perceived threats by how the route changes. A neat little insight and very useful in escaping/avoiding fights.

[Alfred]

Lowpe/DesertWolf101,

It is a matrix which involves routing setting, threat setting, and TF leader traits. All working within the limitation of local intel.

If you want to avoid combat, the best approach is to avoid being in the place where it might happen. This is where the routing and threat settings come into play predominantly. The former in giving guidance to the TF as to how much potential danger to expose the TF in choosing the route to get from A to B. The odds of being in the place for combat is related to the routng option chosen.

The threat setting is primarily focused on enemy air because that generally is more "transparent" from the MDL. The setting really is stating whether the TF should be in that location at all if there is a choice.

Now if the TF finds itself in a place where there is eminent combat, it is the TF leader who assess whether to decline/accept battle. At this stage, where the Combat Animation screen appears, there is a range of factors taken into account by the leader. However irrespective of his decision battle may or may not ensue for reasons out of his control. For example the leader may decide to decline combat but the enemy TF is faster and is able to close the distance and open fire before you can get out of Dodge City.

In short for the matrix, before the Combat Animation screen, the routing/threat settings are prominent. Once that screen appears, it is the leader traits that are prominent.

Always subject to known local intel and randoms.

Alfred

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: Alfred


Introduced in Patch 6, Tweak #39.

Alfred

Patch notes are tough to read, and even tougher to remember [;)], but they give such a deep insight and appreciation into the depth in this game.

I put the patch notes in a word processer and search for key words. If you haven't done it before, search using radar. Super insightful.

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: Alfred

In short for the matrix, before the Combat Animation screen, the routing/threat settings are prominent. Once that screen appears, it is the leader traits that are prominent.

Always subject to known local intel and randoms.

Alfred

Great intel as always, Alfred.[&o] It really helps.

Importance of MDL pretty under appreciated. Most players really like to have their units follow orders slavishly, I much prefer giving local commanders a lot of choice generally speaking. 2 day turns will be a great experiment in this!

[DesertWolf101]

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: Alfred

In short for the matrix, before the Combat Animation screen, the routing/threat settings are prominent. Once that screen appears, it is the leader traits that are prominent.

Always subject to known local intel and randoms.

Alfred

Great intel as always, Alfred.[&o] It really helps.

Importance of MDL pretty under appreciated. Most players really like to have their units follow orders slavishly, I much prefer giving local commanders a lot of choice generally speaking. 2 day turns will be a great experiment in this!

+1

Very helpful as always.

[Alfred]

Lowpe,

I forgot to mention this previously. If you are allowed, change the Home Port of Force Z to a safer location such as Batavia or Soerabaja. The choice depends on where you want it to stationed from turn 2 onwards (9 December 1941).

With a safer home port plus the "Low" setting (and "Safest" too), there is a small chance it will move in the general direction of away (as Monty Python would say) rather than stick around looking for action. Of course Admiral Philips may have other ideas.

None of this is possible on a Historical 7 Dec 1941 start as movement paths and combat decisions are hard coded.

Alfred

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: Alfred


With a safer home port plus the "Low" setting (and "Safest" too), there is a small chance it will move in the general direction of away (as Monty Python would say) rather than stick around looking for action. Of course Admiral Philips may have other ideas.

Alfred

I tested some of this a fair bit, trying to save Force Z (and also the USN Minesweepers in the Pacific).

Without changing their destination point, you simply cannot gather enough information for the local commanders to change their route on day 1.

I put timid Wingrove in charge of Force Z, no joy. Even went so far as to set up night naval search with a patrol, flood size 4 area runways with Dutch subs, and tinker with the altitude of the Buffalos from Singers. No surprise that the night naval search doesn't fly first day.

Force Z can survive, damaged, especially if the morning attack is light. But if Japan tasks those Bettys and Nells with other orders heading north into danger might put Force Z out of reach of a Carrier strike hunting them down south near Palembang.

It is a crapshoot either way.

[Lowpe]

Feel free to help Japan out with advice in their thread in the War Room about splitting the KB. I have avoided that thread, myself.

Thanks.

[Lowpe]

Australia

I have glanced over it. Nothing startling here. Plan on shipping AA and Fighters here ASAP. AA from III Indian and also from US. Form up some of the Australian Divisions. Almost no shipping will be base here rather going to New Zealand or off map until the threat of an around the continent KB romp is gone.

Queen Elizabeth will make some runs...probably California to New Zealand, Auckland can handle her.

I noticed some of the early Cape Town convoys bring Oz devices, including Matildas. Will exercise care in device allotment, and I doubt I spend PP here unless it becomes the focus of Japan. But I am open to that approach too.

[Lowpe]

India:

Initially:

Runway building at Ledo, AA here.

Forts at Ledo, Calcutta, Diamond Harbor, Cox, Akyab and the new dot base to the north, Chittagong, Viz, Madras, Bombay and Calcutta.

Command HQ prep on either Viz, Diamond Harbor, Cox, or Chittagong. If Japan comes in force I don't plan on sacrificing troops at Calcutta, defend only if viable retreat paths are open.

Ceylon: Good AA bought off and moved to India, strip it of fuel and supplies. The only reason to hold it is as either a trap, or if AV is in play. It is not crucial to my defensive thinking.

US engineers and base forces along with at least one tank unit early on plus bombers and fighters.

[Lowpe]

West Coast

We will garrison and expect a potential raid on the West Coast. Troops to Vancouver. AA to protect strategic bombing targets along with some select fighter squadrons to be put on a basic CAP/Training regiment there. CV raids for strategic VP is a lot different now that it is based of cruise speed....they must get much closer.

I don't want to fight in the Aleutians, with the USN at their most vulnerable.

Still figuring out how off map movement works. I am leaning to never send escorts off map, but have staging bases or areas and try to run a lot of the ocean without escorts -- use escorts at high risk areas only. I will never use surface warships as escorts for convoys. If Japan gets SAGs into them, well done then.[:)]

Will be developing bases from the West Coast out...securing them sequentially.

I like using dot bases for a variety of uses: seaplane tenders for a lot of search bases that are hopefully hidden from Japan. Putting Catalinas on a base likely to be bombarded is rough. In addition you can make neat destroyer raid bases and even pt boat bases like that.

In the chaotic early days of Japanese heavy aggression, hiding two Clemsons on a dot base and letting the Japanese frontlines go past, opens up really intriguing opportunities to get at Japanese merchant shipping. The trick is getting the AGP and AD and even AO there, and finding ones that have low VPs too. Dutch are good for that.

Having a hidden float plane strike base is not out of the question too.

[RangerJoe]

Be careful about upgrading Australian armoured units. Those Matildas might get bypassed and then rust in storage. Maybe stockpile the next tanks in line so you will use the Matildas up. That way, if they see heavy fighting, you will have tanks to refill them.

[Jorge_Stanbury]

I agree Ceylon can be a nice trap, in my game I built airfields at Madurai and Tanjore, which are on range and without risk of naval bombardment; I was waiting for a possible Ceylon invasion.. in the end the invasion never came, thus ended up abandoning those bases and resupplying/ refueling Colombo which is now where most of the British fleet is parked

[Jorge_Stanbury]

You should escort important convoys, those carrying divisions, fuel is not so much of a problem for the Allies, hence you can use the R battleships to guard premium convoys

regarding dot bases:
if you can, try to use level 1 ports instead, there are plenty of them in the SRA; the key advantage is you can resupply by submarine. and then it is less of a headache to keep that base supplied

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Be careful about upgrading Australian armoured units. Those Matildas might get bypassed and then rust in storage. Maybe stockpile the next tanks in line so you will use the Matildas up. That way, if they see heavy fighting, you will have tanks to refill them.

Not sure I understand.

Oz Matilda goes to Grant/Lees, Grant/Lee goes to Churchill something.

I think I would rather have a unit fight with Matildas, than a generic hvy AFV, and if I could instead have Grant/Lees over Matildas I would rather they rust in the pools than provide Japan with easier VP.