Anyone have a better explanation? [&:]

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









Strange results, my level 4 forts mean the attack comes off at 1-3,
but I still suffer most of the casualties. I assume it’s because I have no anti-tank weapons


ORIGINAL: Crackaces
Strange results, my level 4 forts mean the attack comes off at 1-3,
but I still suffer most of the casualties. I assume it’s because I have no anti-tank weapons
Don't confuse firepower and AV .... AV determines if you retreat or not .. Firepower determines casualties
US armor is devastating ... Marines have the highest firepower to stacking limit concentration ..



ORIGINAL: Justus2
Saipan hit level 6 forts today, though!! [:)]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
ORIGINAL: Justus2
Saipan hit level 6 forts today, though!! [:)]
Great news! That's big. I'd stop building forts now, If I were you. You'll never make it to level 7 and the supply consumption trying to get there in vain isn't worth it.
Really enjoying the AAR, Justus2. You're doing a much better job than I did whittling away at his forces.
I'm really surprised to see him back off of your main carrier forces. He's got the big bat, I'm surprised that he hasn't used it to follow you to Iwo Jima, Palau and other bases and just smash the **** out of everything afloat. This attritional warfare against his amphibious forces isn't to his strength-but it is to yours. Go get 'im, tiger! [8D]
ETA: IRL, the A2A ratio was something >5:1 in favor of the Allies for the Marianas. In my game, I managed under a 1:2 IIRC (not quite 2 Japanese losses for every Allied plane downed). I was happy with that. You're achieving >1:1, which is fantastic! [&o]
Of course, you will lose a large number of those with a serious carrier naval air engagement and exchange, so bear that in mind as you look to this ratio for guidance.

