Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Combat report (see two posts above) showed 33rd Div. adjusted downwards for leaders, fatigue and experience. Why? This division looks pretty good to me. And the leader is outstanding. What's going on underneath the hood?

ORIGINAL: venividivici10044a

Looking back at my post from July 1st, it still looks a lot like 6th Army at Stalingrad. I do appreciate one thing though about the Pacific strategy in the real war, an invasion of China would have been a blood bath due to the numbers of Japanese troops that might have been engaged. While people speak about Army
force compositions at this stage of the war, I think the overlooked portion of the equation is numbers. If you throw enough experienced troops at a good unit with better equipment, you may see some wrecked divisions. I would consider some of the marine divisions during the island campaigns - fixed enemy forces battered the marines pretty hard.

As to the aircraft buildup on your flanks, kamikazes perhaps? I'd say good move on pulling back the big boys, they probably would have walked into an ambush.

OT1: Allied intel was very good at this stage of the war. Does the game portray this well would be my question?

OT2: I'd hazard a guess that your esteemed opponent is busy pulling out troops on the perimeter. I would be doing this if it were me at this stage of the game. What I don't understand is why you'd dump them in backwater theaters like SE Asia. Obviously in a real conflict, one could say for what purpose while here I'd surmise VP generation and perhaps preservation of coastal bases. Why? In the real war, the Kaigun was to a degree wasted in useless and defiant acts. In a game where VP exists, force preservation matters. You need places to hide those ships.

I think I see your end game based on a statement or two...the question becomes with the altered history allowing Japan to focus research on bomber killer aircraft, do you think your 4E bombers have the ability to incinerate Japan. If not, you may be in for a grind on land.

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth
"TURKEY TROTS TO WATER. WHERE, REPEAT WHERE, ARE THE UPGRADED CHINESE DIVISIONS? THE WORLD WONDERS"

ORIGINAL: venividivici10044a

Looking back at my post from July 1st, it still looks a lot like 6th Army at Stalingrad. I do appreciate one thing though about the Pacific strategy in the real war, an invasion of China would have been a blood bath due to the numbers of Japanese troops that might have been engaged. While people speak about Army
force compositions at this stage of the war, I think the overlooked portion of the equation is numbers. If you throw enough experienced troops at a good unit with better equipment, you may see some wrecked divisions. I would consider some of the marine divisions during the island campaigns - fixed enemy forces battered the marines pretty hard.

As to the aircraft buildup on your flanks, kamikazes perhaps? I'd say good move on pulling back the big boys, they probably would have walked into an ambush.

OT1: Allied intel was very good at this stage of the war. Does the game portray this well would be my question?

OT2: I'd hazard a guess that your esteemed opponent is busy pulling out troops on the perimeter. I would be doing this if it were me at this stage of the game. What I don't understand is why you'd dump them in backwater theaters like SE Asia. Obviously in a real conflict, one could say for what purpose while here I'd surmise VP generation and perhaps preservation of coastal bases. Why? In the real war, the Kaigun was to a degree wasted in useless and defiant acts. In a game where VP exists, force preservation matters. You need places to hide those ships.

I think I see your end game based on a statement or two...the question becomes with the altered history allowing Japan to focus research on bomber killer aircraft, do you think your 4E bombers have the ability to incinerate Japan. If not, you may be in for a grind on land.

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

9/18/44

If I understand this game, I think it may be more efficient to engage in strategic bombing of Home Island industry rather than invading and taking bases. The latter seems like a more expensive and risky method of scoring points. So the long term plan is to close on Japan and hammer it from the air even while turning my military focus on the DEI for the rest of '44. But I'll continually reevaluate options.

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I went back a few days to take another look at 33rd U.S. Division just before she underwent attack.

She looked like a fine division ready to dish it out.

The only possibilities I can come up with: (1) bad luck on dice roles? (2) perhaps those 37mm AT guns screwed the pooch vs. 2nd Tank Div. (3) Perhaps 2nd Tank Div. has elite experience - 20 points or so higher than the Americans?

Well, time to move on; but I'll be a bit antsy the next time an American division goes into combat in China.

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn

Does moving even in combat mode give penalties?

"» Combat – The unit is in optimal formation for fighting – but has its movement reduced because the unit is moving tactically anticipating a battle. "


May have done better if in an Attack mode instead of Defend. That was a lot of Jap vehicles. It's not that you did bad but that you suffered penalties.

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn

Does moving even in combat mode give penalties?

"» Combat – The unit is in optimal formation for fighting – but has its movement reduced because the unit is moving tactically anticipating a battle. "


May have done better if in an Attack mode instead of Defend. That was a lot of Jap vehicles. It's not that you did bad but that you suffered penalties.

I believe that it does. I am sure that it means any fortifications are not counted (and field fortifications are reset to 0); I suspect terrain benefits might be lessened; and I suspect a penalty of some kind is applied.