Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: GetAssista
Why would you want Strat mode for units sailing to Korea from Tsingtao and not use amphib TF transport instead? Strat mode wastes time changing out/into combat mode and restricts loading/unloading to port facilities (how large is Gunzan port? how much nav support in both it and Tsingtao?). The only benefit of Transport TF is 20% less cargo/troop space, but you have enough ships on hand I believe. I assume you do not plan to use RR strat mode immediately for units when landed in Korea with that situation on hand.

I'll take another look at it. My main reason is to expedite loading at Tsingtao so that Death Star or CVE Death Star is there (providing cover) as briefly as possible. Ideally, I'd like CVE DS to be in the neighborhood of Tsingtao no more than one or two days.

I need to be careful in my response here so I dont break any opsec. But I can say this: your victory comes from identifying a path to victory, make plans accordingly and follow those plans without getting sidetracked by irrelevant targets, no matter how tempting. The game for the allies is, afterall, about defeating Japan. If this can be achieved without a huge CV-battle, so much the better, no matter how cool the screenshots would be.

There are several different ways Japan can be defeated in this game. One variant is to get enough airbases close enough to the Japanese cities to win by strategic bombing. This is the path you chose somewhere in 43 I guess. And this path to victory does not require the recapture of Singapore or Palembang or Rabaul, the Auletians or whathaveyou. Nor does it require sinking his CVs. All those things are irrelevant. You know this, and played accordingly.

It seems your opponent was trying to defend against all the ways Japan can be defeated. This made him vunerable to your specific chosen strategy because he who defends everything defends nothing. At least that is what it seems like looking at the strategic map without going into any of his troop dispositions.

Hortlund, the other issue (IMHO) is that fans of both AARs naturally like to call for aggressive action and a nice "big bang" CV battle because it's really great entertainment. Part of the job of both players is to read such comments and suggestions with suitable skepticism and a constant eye toward the overall strategic mission.

Wife, Oldest Son and I are going to a restaurant that has televisions that will be turned to the Georgia-Alabama game. I think Georgia has a chance but I think Alabama is certainly the favorite.

I was present the last time Georgia won a national championship. That was in the Sugar Bowl vs. Notre Dame in January 1981. I was a sophomore at Georgia at the time. That was 37 years ago....which leads me to believe there's usually only one place to go after winning a national championship. Down. Unless, that is, you're talking Alabama.

Oof.

3/20/45

DEI: I'm pretty sure the Herd is carrying enough supply to see things through to victory, but LOC operations down south continue efficiently...and I think John has new plans to try to interdict in some fashion.

3/20/45

Singers Campaign: The Allied advance continues, mostly comprised of British and Indian units.

3/20/45

Asia: Allies operations in China and Korea moving forward....and Death Star and the Herd maybe two days out of Gunzan.

Any thoughts to setting some aircraft on low level night naval strike to hit those supply TFs?

I haven't had any luck with night strikes against any shipping. At this point, I forego it because it seems inefficient - taking up supply and causing fatigue with little or no return.

Same thing with aerial mining of ports. No return at all on the investment. Better to devote the 4EB to daylight raids vs. significant targets.

And utilizing your abundant surface assets to chew up his merchants......

When the right opportunities exist. But sending combat TFs into the Sea of Japan won't work as long as John controls Fusan and Moppo. No need to risk valuable assets going after cheap assets in waters dominated by enemy air.

Condolences on the game.

[:)]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I haven't had any luck with night strikes against any shipping. At this point, I forego it because it seems inefficient - taking up supply and causing fatigue with little or no return.

Same thing with aerial mining of ports. No return at all on the investment. Better to devote the 4EB to daylight raids vs. significant targets.

I only air mine ports that are in range of my DDs so that I can keep enemy sweepers away otherwise it is just a waste of time. However, air mining enemy bases near an offensive or defensive operation is a viable tactic. But not if you can't keep minesweepers away.

3/21/45

The Herd: A roster of the Herd's supply TFs, which will arrive at Gunzan tomorrow. I think this is somewhere around 1.5 million supply. I detached xAKs carrying 300k supply to Shanghai (so that not all eggs in one basket). Additional supply went to Luzon and Formosa.

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I'm interested in reading John's AAR to see if his Peanut Gallery urged him to implement an extreme points-saving strategy to postpone defeat as long as possible. Perhaps it was just his strong disinclination to take on Death Star. I think he should have combined his carriers and struck when Death Star was proximate to a nest of his airfields instead of suffering a long, lingering defeat.

I haven't really read in his AAR.

Here's the thing though...

Having a carrier battle would, most likely, postpone defeat more than not having a carrier battle. If he sinks 4 of yours, even if he loses 7 of his (which are worth less VPs than yours) and more planes (you'd still lose a lot of planes) he's still traded at less than a 2:1 margin for you - and whatever that difference is, that's how many VPs you now need to make up for.

The question, really, is whether doing that is more beneficial points-wise than raiding. At some point closer to the 2:1 ratio, raiding is better because it doesn't involve the permanent loss of assets. However, it's also permanent loss of assets for you... but at some point for you, if there's no KB lurking about then you don't need so much concentrated air cover for an invasion. LBA strikes are more fragmented than CV strikes.

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

Condolences on the game.

I saw this while scrolling back up and thought, "Wait, did John resign?"

Shame. [:-]

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I'm interested in reading John's AAR to see if his Peanut Gallery urged him to implement an extreme points-saving strategy to postpone defeat as long as possible. Perhaps it was just his strong disinclination to take on Death Star. I think he should have combined his carriers and struck when Death Star was proximate to a nest of his airfields instead of suffering a long, lingering defeat.

I haven't really read in his AAR.

Here's the thing though...

Having a carrier battle would, most likely, postpone defeat more than not having a carrier battle. If he sinks 4 of yours, even if he loses 7 of his (which are worth less VPs than yours) and more planes (you'd still lose a lot of planes) he's still traded at less than a 2:1 margin for you - and whatever that difference is, that's how many VPs you now need to make up for.

The question, really, is whether doing that is more beneficial points-wise than raiding. At some point closer to the 2:1 ratio, raiding is better because it doesn't involve the permanent loss of assets. However, it's also permanent loss of assets for you... but at some point for you, if there's no KB lurking about then you don't need so much concentrated air cover for an invasion. LBA strikes are more fragmented than CV strikes.

My thinking was this: If John managed to take out a number of Allied carriers, even at great expense to himself, I figured it would slow me down considerably. A smaller Death Star would be more susceptible when approaching major enemy airfields. Possibly it might have limited or eliminated Allied options to penetrate deeply against Formosa or China, at least for some meaningful period of time.

3/21/45

Asia: Barring a last-minute dagger to the heart (something akin to a 41-yard TD pass in overtime to win a national championship....), the Herd will reach Gunzan tomorrow with 1.5 million supply and about three divisions of reinforcements (with more reinforcements coming).

It will take several days to offload enough supply to fully fund massive air operations from Gunzan airfield and a ground campaign in the southern end of the peninsula, but hyper-war (Operation Unicycle) is about to commence. The 4EB are rested and in good shape. Three new B-29B squadrons (15 planes each) are also on the scene.