PBEM from May 42: Mogami-san VS Capt. Ron

Post descriptions of your brilliant successes and unfortunate demises.

Moderators: wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

User avatar
Tristanjohn
Posts: 3027
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 4:50 am
Location: Daly City CA USA
Contact:

RE: July 27th, 1942: DEI

Post by Tristanjohn »

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Anyway, I'm not saying you are exploiting the system here. What are you supposed to do, nothing? The fact that the game has weird ZOC issues which benefit attacker, among many others, and is not the attackers fault, it's a mechanics issue. The defender will get screwed in these cases...look at what happened to our Luzon Campaign.

The ZOC issue for contested hexes kept the units in Manila from withdrawing or retreating to Clark, also contested. So. Manila units were destroyed, then Clark units get hammered until they fell back to Bataan, then they fell in a day. Only way to avoid this is to constantly fall back without defending until all units are at Clark, hardly an award winning combat model.

I agree with Mogami that AARs would be more enjoyable without the constant harping on the poor hopeless game system . . . but I have to support you on this one. The ground-combat model makes no sense. Nothing for the ground-combat model. It won't even allow units to exit a hex that is "contested" unless the DH is a friendly base/beach hex. What kind of rule is that? What is it supposed to model exactly? Whatever it's supposed to model, it couldn't work in a hundred years in China.

It's a sad state of affairs. [:(]

Regarding Frank Jack Fletcher: They should have named an oiler after him instead. -- Irrelevant
User avatar
Ron Saueracker
Posts: 10967
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece

RE: July 29th, 1942

Post by Ron Saueracker »

After the abortion I have made of the Wuchow/Kweilin sector, I have decided to withdraw my troops towards Kweiyang, Regardless of ZOC issues or what have you, I was simply running out of supply anyway. Tough keeping Chinese troops eating at western military levels. I simply can't get the bastards to eat rice which grows in abundance! Has to be corned beef, fried chicken, beef steak, white bread, pea soup etc, and they are eating plates of it per person per sitting.[X(][:D]

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 07/29/42

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Hsinyang , at 49,33

Japanese aircraft
Ki-27 Nate x 8

Allied aircraft
SB-2c x 22

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-51 Sonia: 2 destroyed, 1 damaged


Runway hits 11

Aircraft Attacking:
SB-2Cs bombing at 14000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Kendari , at 33,71


Allied aircraft
LB-30 Liberator x 28


No Allied losses

Resources hits 13

Aircraft Attacking:
LB-30 Liberators bombing at 21000 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Amboina , at 39,73


Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 19


No Allied losses

Oil hits 4

Aircraft Attacking:
B-17E Fortresses bombing at 19000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 13th Tank Regiment, at 43,38


Allied aircraft
IL-4c x 8


No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
6 casualties reported
Vehicles lost 1

Aircraft Attacking:
IL-4Cs bombing at 14000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 38th Division, at 28,37


Allied aircraft
Hurricane II x 10
Spitfire Vb x 9
Beaufort I x 6
Beaufort V-IX x 11


No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
38 casualties reported

Aircraft Attacking:
Beaufort Is and V-IXs bombing at 2000 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 21st Division, at 28,37


Allied aircraft
Hurricane II x 2
Spitfire Vb x 2
Beaufort I x 3
Beaufort V-IX x 6


No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
31 casualties reported

Aircraft Attacking:
Beaufort Is and V-IXs bombing at 2000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 8th Tank Regiment, at 29,37


Allied aircraft
Blenheim IV x 62


Allied aircraft losses
Blenheim IV: 1 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
68 casualties reported
Guns lost 1
Vehicles lost 4

Aircraft Attacking:
Blenheim IVs bombing at 2000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 4th Chinese Corps, at 42,39

Japanese aircraft
Ki-51 Sonia x 19

No Japanese losses


Allied ground losses:
32 casualties reported

Aircraft Attacking:
Ki-51 Sonias bombing at 2000 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Macassar , at 30,69


Allied aircraft
Martin 139 x 25
B-25C Mitchell x 20


Allied aircraft losses
Martin 139: 2 damaged
B-25C Mitchell: 1 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
23 casualties reported

Airbase hits 2
Runway hits 9
Port supply hits 2

Aircraft Attacking:
B-25C Mitchells bombing at 2000 feet
Martin 139s bombing at 2000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Wuchow

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 87828 troops, 1028 guns, 15 vehicles

Defending force 30727 troops, 168 guns, 0 vehicles



Allied ground losses:
88 casualties reported
Guns lost 1


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Tavoy

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 8403 troops, 288 guns, 0 vehicles

Defending force 27944 troops, 147 guns, 1 vehicles



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Rahaeng

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 29168 troops, 185 guns, 0 vehicles

Defending force 70288 troops, 271 guns, 289 vehicles


Japanese ground losses:
89 casualties reported
Guns lost 2
Vehicles lost 1


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Tavoy

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 17821 troops, 138 guns, 0 vehicles

Defending force 61945 troops, 514 guns, 256 vehicles


Japanese ground losses:
87 casualties reported
Guns lost 5


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Bali

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 939 troops, 27 guns, 0 vehicles

Defending force 13100 troops, 61 guns, 2 vehicles


Japanese ground losses:
17 casualties reported

Allied ground losses:
5 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

Image

Image

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
User avatar
Ron Saueracker
Posts: 10967
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece

RE: July 27th, 1942: DEI

Post by Ron Saueracker »

ORIGINAL: Tristanjohn

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Anyway, I'm not saying you are exploiting the system here. What are you supposed to do, nothing? The fact that the game has weird ZOC issues which benefit attacker, among many others, and is not the attackers fault, it's a mechanics issue. The defender will get screwed in these cases...look at what happened to our Luzon Campaign.

The ZOC issue for contested hexes kept the units in Manila from withdrawing or retreating to Clark, also contested. So. Manila units were destroyed, then Clark units get hammered until they fell back to Bataan, then they fell in a day. Only way to avoid this is to constantly fall back without defending until all units are at Clark, hardly an award winning combat model.

I agree with Mogami that AARs would be more enjoyable without the constant harping on the poor hopeless game system . . . but I have to support you on this one. The ground-combat model makes no sense. Nothing for the ground-combat model. It won't even allow units to exit a hex that is "contested" unless the DH is a friendly base/beach hex. What kind of rule is that? What is it supposed to model exactly? Whatever it's supposed to model, it couldn't work in a hundred years in China.

It's a sad state of affairs. [:(]


I also agree that AARs should not be more entertaining and less a device for highlighting game issues, but what better way to emphasize points than through playing the game and illustration in the AAR. No confusion, lots of opportunity to show just how often things occur, why, where, etc. We basically have very little (perhaps none) time to highlight deficiencies before the cut off point so I must continue to use AARs this way to some degree. If someone will tell me for sure that major issues like land combat/ASW/strike coordination or anything else are not going to be fixed or improved, then I'll stop, because no use in bitching over done deals, but while the game is still supported I feel the need to do this. Sorry if it annoys people but if it does, read something else.


Image

Image

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
User avatar
Ron Saueracker
Posts: 10967
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece

RE: July 30th, 1942

Post by Ron Saueracker »

The disintegration of the Wuchow/Kweilin sector due to my crappy dispositions continues.

I'm hoping the RN withdrawl requirements are gentle this month or I'm going to be severly restricted in the DEI and Australia theatres.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 07/30/42

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack at 55,88

Japanese Ships
MSW Banshu Maru #56
MSW Toshi Maru #8
PG Nikkai Maru
PG Nishho Maru
PG Saiko Maru

Allied Ships
SS S-34, hits 2, on fire

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 1st Tank Regiment, at 29,38


Allied aircraft
Blenheim IV x 46


No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
32 casualties reported
Vehicles lost 2

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 4th Chinese Corps, at 42,39

Japanese aircraft
Ki-51 Sonia x 20

No Japanese losses


Allied ground losses:
28 casualties reported
Guns lost 2

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on VI Garrison Battalion, at 24,68

Japanese aircraft
Ki-27 Nate x 7
Ki-21 Sally x 28

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21 Sally: 2 damaged


Allied ground losses:
25 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Macassar , at 30,69


Allied aircraft
Martin 139 x 28
B-25C Mitchell x 22


Allied aircraft losses
Martin 139: 1 damaged
B-25C Mitchell: 3 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
35 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

Airbase hits 2
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 12
Port hits 2
Port supply hits 4

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Wuchow

Japanese Shock attack

Attacking force 87985 troops, 1037 guns, 14 vehicles

Defending force 12189 troops, 33 guns, 0 vehicles

Japanese assault odds: 2 to 1 (fort level 9)

Japanese Assault reduces fortifications to 7


Japanese ground losses:
37 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

Allied ground losses:
179 casualties reported
Guns lost 1


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Tavoy

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 8383 troops, 288 guns, 0 vehicles

Defending force 28239 troops, 152 guns, 2 vehicles



Allied ground losses:
273 casualties reported
Guns lost 6


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Rahaeng

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 29191 troops, 188 guns, 0 vehicles

Defending force 70679 troops, 274 guns, 289 vehicles


Japanese ground losses:
93 casualties reported


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Tavoy

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 15191 troops, 127 guns, 0 vehicles

Defending force 62010 troops, 516 guns, 258 vehicles


Japanese ground losses:
26 casualties reported


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Bali

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 841 troops, 16 guns, 0 vehicles

Defending force 13400 troops, 65 guns, 2 vehicles


Japanese ground losses:
2 casualties reported

Image

Image

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
User avatar
Tristanjohn
Posts: 3027
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 4:50 am
Location: Daly City CA USA
Contact:

RE: July 27th, 1942: DEI

Post by Tristanjohn »

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

ORIGINAL: Tristanjohn

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

Anyway, I'm not saying you are exploiting the system here. What are you supposed to do, nothing? The fact that the game has weird ZOC issues which benefit attacker, among many others, and is not the attackers fault, it's a mechanics issue. The defender will get screwed in these cases...look at what happened to our Luzon Campaign.

The ZOC issue for contested hexes kept the units in Manila from withdrawing or retreating to Clark, also contested. So. Manila units were destroyed, then Clark units get hammered until they fell back to Bataan, then they fell in a day. Only way to avoid this is to constantly fall back without defending until all units are at Clark, hardly an award winning combat model.

I agree with Mogami that AARs would be more enjoyable without the constant harping on the poor hopeless game system . . . but I have to support you on this one. The ground-combat model makes no sense. Nothing for the ground-combat model. It won't even allow units to exit a hex that is "contested" unless the DH is a friendly base/beach hex. What kind of rule is that? What is it supposed to model exactly? Whatever it's supposed to model, it couldn't work in a hundred years in China.

It's a sad state of affairs. [:(]


I also agree that AARs should not be more entertaining and less a device for highlighting game issues, but what better way to emphasize points than through playing the game and illustration in the AAR. No confusion, lots of opportunity to show just how often things occur, why, where, etc. We basically have very little (perhaps none) time to highlight deficiencies before the cut off point so I must continue to use AARs this way to some degree. If someone will tell me for sure that major issues like land combat/ASW/strike coordination or anything else are not going to be fixed or improved, then I'll stop, because no use in bitching over done deals, but while the game is still supported I feel the need to do this. Sorry if it annoys people but if it does, read something else.


It doesn't annoy me. I agree with almost all of your points. Just throwing Mogami a bone. [:D]
Regarding Frank Jack Fletcher: They should have named an oiler after him instead. -- Irrelevant
User avatar
Ron Saueracker
Posts: 10967
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece

RE: July 31st, 1942

Post by Ron Saueracker »

Mogami captures Bali and many troops not able to evac on C 47s are condemned to possibly years in Japanese concentration camps. Seven of the cargo planes are lost to Japanese CAP.

In China, Wuchow is captured as the Japnese find the city devoid of Chinese soldiers.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 07/31/42

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack at 69,49

Japanese Ships
AP Hokoku Maru
PC Fumi Maru #3
MSW Wa 1

Allied Ships
SS Swordfish

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 55th Division, at 31,35


Allied aircraft
Spitfire Vb x 12
Beaufort I x 10
Beaufort V-IX x 20


No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
67 casualties reported
Guns lost 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Pomala , at 32,69


Allied aircraft
Martin 139 x 22
F-5A Lightning x 1
B-25C Mitchell x 17


No Allied losses

Airbase hits 1
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 2

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Bali

Japanese Shock attack

Attacking force 13678 troops, 66 guns, 3 vehicles

Defending force 3835 troops, 21 guns, 4 vehicles

Japanese assault odds: 5 to 1 (fort level 3)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Bali base !!!


Japanese ground losses:
145 casualties reported
Guns lost 7
Vehicles lost 2

Allied ground losses:
5443 casualties reported
Guns lost 28
Vehicles lost 1


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Wuchow

Japanese Shock attack

Attacking force 89590 troops, 1101 guns, 15 vehicles

Defending force 0 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles

Japanese assault odds: 514 to 1 (fort level 7)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Wuchow base !!!



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Tavoy

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 8413 troops, 289 guns, 0 vehicles

Defending force 27995 troops, 149 guns, 2 vehicles



Allied ground losses:
168 casualties reported
Guns lost 1


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Rahaeng

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 29362 troops, 199 guns, 0 vehicles

Defending force 70807 troops, 276 guns, 289 vehicles


Japanese ground losses:
113 casualties reported
Guns lost 3
Vehicles lost 1


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Tavoy

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 15135 troops, 130 guns, 0 vehicles

Defending force 62191 troops, 524 guns, 259 vehicles


Japanese ground losses:
77 casualties reported
Guns lost 1
Vehicles lost 1

Image

Image

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
User avatar
Ron Saueracker
Posts: 10967
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece

RE: Aug 2nd, 1942

Post by Ron Saueracker »

No dramatic developments last few days. Aside from a few air attacks and a Japanese landing at Buna, all is relatively quiet as preperations for a much larger clash continue.
Image

Image

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
User avatar
Tom Hunter
Posts: 2194
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 1:57 am

Fighting in China

Post by Tom Hunter »

When Blackwatch starts moving Japanese troops in China they way Mogami is moving his troops I start moving to. Sometimes I move fragments of a division, other times I move 50,000 troops. Sometimes he bashes my guys out of the way and sometimes I knock a whole division off the rails and out of action for a week [:)].

As far as I can tell the Chinese can take what ever the Japanese throw at them. Casualties don't really matter there are always more Chinese if you just keep the divisions alive.

I think land combat is a mess like many other aspects of the game but its plenty playable and Ron's problems near Wuchow are not because of problems with the land combat model they are deployment decisions. A few strong Chinese units in either the road hex North of Wuchow or the road junction hex North of that could easily shock attack Mogami's division back into the forest and maybe even hound it back to the rail line. Every time Wuchow has been as much as threatened in my game with Blackwatch there have been 10,000 to 30,000 Chinese troops in one of these two hexes and I still have Wuchow.
User avatar
Ron Saueracker
Posts: 10967
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece

RE: Fighting in China

Post by Ron Saueracker »

ORIGINAL: Tom Hunter

When Blackwatch starts moving Japanese troops in China they way Mogami is moving his troops I start moving to. Sometimes I move fragments of a division, other times I move 50,000 troops. Sometimes he bashes my guys out of the way and sometimes I knock a whole division off the rails and out of action for a week [:)].

As far as I can tell the Chinese can take what ever the Japanese throw at them. Casualties don't really matter there are always more Chinese if you just keep the divisions alive.

I think land combat is a mess like many other aspects of the game but its plenty playable and Ron's problems near Wuchow are not because of problems with the land combat model they are deployment decisions. A few strong Chinese units in either the road hex North of Wuchow or the road junction hex North of that could easily shock attack Mogami's division back into the forest and maybe even hound it back to the rail line. Every time Wuchow has been as much as threatened in my game with Blackwatch there have been 10,000 to 30,000 Chinese troops in one of these two hexes and I still have Wuchow.

I really did not have enough units or enough time to set up flanks for those base hexes near Woochow and Kweilin. Most of my units were just arriving from the Yenen sector. Perhaps I could have weakened the bases and moved some badly needed troops to the flanks, but then the attacker simply concentrates overwhelming force at the weakened base and the flanking units are caught due to movement penalties due to terrain and an inability to project ZOC influence on adjacent hexes as in more traditional single hex occupancy games with a smaller hex scale. I've also had only one occasion in all my PBEMs where I have managed to force a Japanese LCU to retreat.

Same thing is happening at Tavoy. An IJA armoured unit entered the jungle hex NE of Tavoy and is attempting to enter the road hex directly behind Tavoy to encircle the otherwise overwhelming Allied forces there. I have an infantry unit entering the jungle hex as well and an armoured unit on the road hex to repel him if he makes it there before the infantry unit reaches the jungle hex. Problem here will be if Armoured units are not penalized vs infantry with AT weapons in jungle terrain. Armoured units should almost be denied access to Jungle hexes and at the very least, suffer horrible combat penalties operating within them vs infantry (esp without infantry support).

In any case, I'm more than a little concerned
Image

Image

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
User avatar
Ron Saueracker
Posts: 10967
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece

Aug 3, 1942

Post by Ron Saueracker »

Japanese I boat hits a small TK leaving Suva. The two Allied escorts, the relatively new Mackinac and an Aussie MSW fail to locate the devil.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 08/03/42

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 42 troops unloading over beach at Buna, 55,90


Japanese ground losses:
13 casualties reported

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack at 83,115

Japanese Ships
SS I-29

Allied Ships
TK Iris, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
AVD Mackinac
MSW Wollongong

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Tavoy

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 8376 troops, 289 guns, 0 vehicles

Defending force 28545 troops, 183 guns, 2 vehicles

Allied ground losses:
127 casualties reported
Guns lost 2

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Buna

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 2427 troops, 11 guns, 0 vehicles

Defending force 0 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles

Japanese assault odds: 30 to 1 (fort level 0)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Buna base !!!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Rahaeng

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 29483 troops, 207 guns, 0 vehicles

Defending force 71521 troops, 282 guns, 288 vehicles


Japanese ground losses:
44 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Tavoy

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 20834 troops, 169 guns, 0 vehicles

Defending force 62590 troops, 535 guns, 259 vehicles


Japanese ground losses:
51 casualties reported
Guns lost 1
Vehicles lost 1

Image

Image

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
User avatar
tsimmonds
Posts: 5490
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 2:01 pm
Location: astride Mason and Dixon's Line

RE: Fighting in China

Post by tsimmonds »

Same thing is happening at Tavoy. An IJA armoured unit entered the jungle hex NE of Tavoy and is attempting to enter the road hex directly behind Tavoy to encircle the otherwise overwhelming Allied forces there. I have an infantry unit entering the jungle hex as well and an armoured unit on the road hex to repel him if he makes it there before the infantry unit reaches the jungle hex. Problem here will be if Armoured units are not penalized vs infantry with AT weapons in jungle terrain. Armoured units should almost be denied access to Jungle hexes and at the very least, suffer horrible combat penalties operating within them vs infantry (esp without infantry support).

I don't understand how anyone can stand to play this game without using Andrew Brown's map data file mod. For an LCU to be able in a single day to jump off the railroad into a jungle hex and have thirty mile's progress to the railroad on the far side is just too much for me. But that's me.[;)]
Fear the kitten!
User avatar
Ron Saueracker
Posts: 10967
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece

RE: Fighting in China

Post by Ron Saueracker »

ORIGINAL: irrelevant
Same thing is happening at Tavoy. An IJA armoured unit entered the jungle hex NE of Tavoy and is attempting to enter the road hex directly behind Tavoy to encircle the otherwise overwhelming Allied forces there. I have an infantry unit entering the jungle hex as well and an armoured unit on the road hex to repel him if he makes it there before the infantry unit reaches the jungle hex. Problem here will be if Armoured units are not penalized vs infantry with AT weapons in jungle terrain. Armoured units should almost be denied access to Jungle hexes and at the very least, suffer horrible combat penalties operating within them vs infantry (esp without infantry support).

I don't understand how anyone can stand to play this game without using Andrew Brown's map data file mod. For an LCU to be able in a single day to jump off the railroad into a jungle hex and have thirty mile's progress to the railroad on the far side is just too much for me. But that's me.[;)]

This match started out as a test for leader bug issues so 100% stock was desired.
Image

Image

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
User avatar
tsimmonds
Posts: 5490
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 2:01 pm
Location: astride Mason and Dixon's Line

RE: Fighting in China

Post by tsimmonds »

I get it. Just ignore me, this is my pet WitP peeve.[;)]
Fear the kitten!
User avatar
Ron Saueracker
Posts: 10967
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Ottawa, Canada OR Zakynthos Island, Greece

RE: Fighting in China

Post by Ron Saueracker »

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

I get it. Just ignore me, this is my pet WitP peeve.[;)]

We all seem to have at least one, eh?[;)]
Image

Image

Yammas from The Apo-Tiki Lounge. Future site of WITP AE benders! And then the s--t hit the fan
User avatar
Andrew Brown
Posts: 4083
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Hex 82,170
Contact:

RE: Fighting in China

Post by Andrew Brown »

I get it. Just ignore me, this is my pet WitP peeve.

It's one of my pet peeves too [:)]
Information about my WitP map, and CHS, can be found on my WitP website

Image
User avatar
Bradley7735
Posts: 2073
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 8:51 pm

RE: Fighting in China

Post by Bradley7735 »

Maybe a good house rule regarding land combat is that you can't move units off the roads/rail/trails. You just move units into a base and try to dislodge the defender. It seems way too easy to surround bases and eliminate the defenders. Because of the movement rules and LOC rules and the fact that allies surrender when facing native spearmen and Japanese don't die when 1.2 million chinese are attacking 15k japanese.

If both of you have to concentrate at the base, neither have to worry about the LOC and movement problems.

Anyway, just an idea.
The older I get, the better I was.
User avatar
Tom Hunter
Posts: 2194
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 1:57 am

RE: Fighting in China

Post by Tom Hunter »

Bradley your making an assumption that the Chinese will be on the defensive. Are rule like the one you propose hamstrings the Chinese, possibley even more than the Japanese. I used overland movement to cut off the Japanese in China, if I was stuck on trails I would have lost the country.

If the Japanese clear the rails how will the Chinese interfere with Japanese plans without overland movement? See the problem? Also overland gives the Chinese some ability to surprise the Japanese which is worth a lot imho.

I think land combat is screwed up, but I think both sides can use the system to thier advantage if they are aware of this. Wander over to my AAR with Blackwatch if you want to see the shoe on the other foot.
User avatar
mogami
Posts: 11053
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 8:00 am
Location: You can't get here from there

RE: Fighting in China

Post by mogami »

ORIGINAL: irrelevant
Same thing is happening at Tavoy. An IJA armoured unit entered the jungle hex NE of Tavoy and is attempting to enter the road hex directly behind Tavoy to encircle the otherwise overwhelming Allied forces there. I have an infantry unit entering the jungle hex as well and an armoured unit on the road hex to repel him if he makes it there before the infantry unit reaches the jungle hex. Problem here will be if Armoured units are not penalized vs infantry with AT weapons in jungle terrain. Armoured units should almost be denied access to Jungle hexes and at the very least, suffer horrible combat penalties operating within them vs infantry (esp without infantry support).

I don't understand how anyone can stand to play this game without using Andrew Brown's map data file mod. For an LCU to be able in a single day to jump off the railroad into a jungle hex and have thirty mile's progress to the railroad on the far side is just too much for me. But that's me.[;)]


Hi, My units that begin on RR do not move off the RR in 1 day. It takes 2 days to move from RR to RR and more to move from RR to non RR. Ron escaped because the units NW never moved. They are on a RR and 6 days after getting movement orders they have not moved.
Image




I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
User avatar
tsimmonds
Posts: 5490
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 2:01 pm
Location: astride Mason and Dixon's Line

RE: Fighting in China

Post by tsimmonds »

Hi, My units that begin on RR do not move off the RR in 1 day. It takes 2 days to move from RR to RR and more to move from RR to non RR. Ron escaped because the units NW never moved. They are on a RR and 6 days after getting movement orders they have not moved.

Difficult to visualize without a situation map. But if you are moving to enter an enemy-occupied hex, that does seem usually to take longer, as does moving units with high (50+) fatigue. But I have seen what I described many times and each time found it irksome.
Fear the kitten!
Halsey
Posts: 4688
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 10:44 pm

RE: Fighting in China

Post by Halsey »

I've thought about this too Bradley. It sure would simplify the burden of a ground campaign. The only thing is, every now and then a retreated unit will get shoved off a road into the middle of nowhere.
So a routine would have to be made available to handle those units.
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”