Notes from a Small Island

[Lokasenna]

I've never noticed much impact from the winter zone beyond Sys damage on ships.

Any effects on your units are also felt by his units, and you have, as the Geico commercials, MORE.

Construction is slower? Allies don't have to care if they bring enough engineers. Sys damage on ships? Allied ships generally have a smaller "repair density" (they repair faster) and they have more ships. Higher operational losses for planes? OK, this one actually swings towards Japan in some cases, but the Allies have deep pools for some models and also lower service ratings basically across the board.

Etc.

[Canoerebel]

The biggest impact is invasions. Contested invasions are a very bad idea during the winter, as is reinforcing a beachhead.
If I'm going to invade in the Cold Zone, I have to do so by November 30 or wait until March 1.

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

The biggest impact is invasions. Contested invasions are a very bad idea during the winter, as is reinforcing a beachhead.
If I'm going to invade in the Cold Zone, I have to do so by November 30 or wait until March 1.

Why? Winter doesn't affect unload rate, does it?

The extra fatigue/disruption seems minimal.

[Canoerebel]

The rulebook says roughly 3x damage in landing. My experience has been consistent with that, though it's somewhat dated. For those reasons, contested amphibious landings in a Cold Zone get clobbered. Am I wrong?

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

The rulebook says roughly 3x damage in landing. My experience has been consistent with that, though it's somewhat dated. For those reasons, contested amphibious landings in a Cold Zone get clobbered. Am I wrong?

I have always believed ("belief" being operative) that the quoted manual section refers to the "17 men and an MG lost over the side while loading"-type messages you get in landings. Maybe five squads, occasionally a tank, three trucks. The manual never speaks to disruption as being "losses." In a multi-division landing 3x the normal level of such losses is not a problem. Certainly not worth waiting four extra months. If you need it, land on it. Time is the enemy.

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

The rulebook says roughly 3x damage in landing. My experience has been consistent with that, though it's somewhat dated. For those reasons, contested amphibious landings in a Cold Zone get clobbered. Am I wrong?

I have always believed ("belief" being operative) that the quoted manual section refers to the "17 men and an MG lost over the side while loading"-type messages you get in landings. Maybe five squads, occasionally a tank, three trucks. The manual never speaks to disruption as being "losses." In a multi-division landing 3x the normal level of such losses is not a problem. Certainly not worth waiting four extra months. If you need it, land on it. Time is the enemy.

+1

[Canoerebel]

The invasion targets are hugely defended - Erik knows what he's doing. The invasions are tough enough as it is. Taking 3x losses (however those losses occur - disruption, disablements, destroyed, whatever) is a serious consideration.

I've engaged in Cold Zone invasions before, on a smaller scale. They were decimated by the contested landings. John III tried the same in counter invading Paramushiro in one of our early games. His force got mauled.

Have you guys tried it with massed invasions of heavily dug in armies on Cold Zone islands (I emphasize massed only because a division vs. a brigade might not extrapolate well to four divisions against the equivalent of two or three)? I prefer definitive information on the order of "been there, tried it, no issue" before I'd try it. Otherwise, I'd rather wait the three (not four) months. In the meantime, I'll have plenty of other battles ongoing, so I won't be losing/wasting any time.

Does that make sense?

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

The invasion targets are hugely defended - Erik knows what he's doing. The invasions are tough enough as it is. Taking 3x losses (however those losses occur - disruption, disablements, destroyed, whatever) is a serious consideration.

I've engaged in Cold Zone invasions before, on a smaller scale. They were decimated by the contested landings. John III tried the same in counter invading Paramushiro in one of our early games. His force got mauled.

Have you guys tried it with massed invasions of heavily dug in armies on Cold Zone islands (I emphasize massed only because a division vs. a brigade might not extrapolate well to four divisions against the equivalent of two or three)? I prefer definitive information on the order of "been there, tried it, no issue" before I'd try it. Otherwise, I'd rather wait the three (not four) months. In the meantime, I'll have plenty of other battles ongoing, so I won't be losing/wasting any time.

Does that make sense?

Checking the dates of my Kuriles invasions, they were in April, so not cold weather.

I am wondering, though, if your previous contested landings (and John's) were not just going to get roughed up anyway, or rolled poorly. I guess the question is really this: do you need the islands? If you need them, it's as Bullwinkle says - time is your enemy, so don't wait 4 months (you only have 16 months remaining to you before the clock expires).

If you don't need them... well, why bother? You've got bombers coming out of your ears, Shikuka can be level 9 and remain outside of feasible IJN bombardments longterm (he can't maintain the price he paid for the last one), and you can just keep the airfields closed while you move on to other targets.

FWIW, in your situation I'd be taking them. Landings may be slightly delayed to allow for further pounding via big guns and bombers, but I don't see the point of subterfuge at this stage and location. Assuming you're prepared for it on any given day, his fleet coming out to offer battle only helps you strategically.

[palioboy2]

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth

I'm currently reading Barbara Tuchman outstanding Guns of August, about the outbreak and first month of WWI. I believe much of our current world is shaped by the events in this book. Clear, concise ,beautifully written history book. It's like a car crash on ice. you are standing on the brakes, knowing whats is happening, and powerless to change things no matter how hard you try. If any of the major players had done a single thing differently our would today would be entirely different. So may chances for events to turn out differently. The world changed that month.....and a master story teller explains how it happened. Mrs. Tuchman has won the Pulitzer Prize twice, including for this book. She can tell a story. A big book and a great summer read.

One of the very best history books I have ever read. I think I have read it 3 times now and would suggest it to anyone

[Canoerebel]

It's a complicated situation. I want to take these islands but don't wish to get my troops unnecessarily messed up, beyond the expected battle casualties, in the process. My experience is that Cold Zone landings will well and truly mess them up.

Why do I want these islands? The are on my LOC, of course, but beyond that they hold more than a half million enemy troops. The Allies are here in huge numbers, having succeeded in drawing the Japanese into a decisive battle. It's been a meat grinder, but thus far the Japanese navy has suffered a serious setback. The battle in the air hasn't been one-sided, but the Allies are making progress there. That leaves the ground battle. At some point, sometime, somewhere, the Japanese army must be attacked and defeated. This is the most efficient environment possible - even though the Kuriles are strongly defended, enemy troops are isolated and the Japanese navy and air forces are at a disadvantage, to one extent or another. This is a compact fighting zone that has many advantages over others. Eventually, the Japanese positions will begin to fall, and then Japan will be really hurting. If the Allies go into the spring of '45 having taking most or all of the upper Kuriles, and having in the process whittled away the Japanese navy, air force and army, then they'll be in a strong position to take the war to Japan proper.

I think I'm right about invading in Cold Zones, but more importantly I don't think it's necessary. The current plan is to invade two more Kuriles before winter sets end, giving me plenty to do during the three-month winter effects. If I run out of things to do, I'd turn to Uruppu, which is outside the Cold Zone.

Final plans haven't been made yet. If Ketoi suddenly falls, I may elect to proceed with Paramushrio this year. But if Ketoi drags out, as currently seems likely, I'll focus on two islands during the winter months, with the possibility of Uruppu as a third.

[Canoerebel]

10/26/44

Ketoi: The amphibious ships finished unloading 6th Division and a cavalry regiment yesterday, but they're still unloading supply.

The LCI(G)s performed well, as expected. I think this is the only one that's taken damage from shore guns.

An AK TF arrives just after this, also bringing supply, and takes a few hits from the enemy guns.

[Canoerebel]

10/26/44

Ketoi: Erik feeds in a few SSX each turn, and each turn a few get sunk. There's lots of dangers in these waters, but thus far the Allied forces have handled them well.

[Canoerebel]

10/26/44

Ketoi: A bigger threat hit but not hard enough.

[Canoerebel]

10/26/44

Ketoi: RN DDs do well.

[Canoerebel]

10/26/44

Ketoi: Message said this LCI(G) was "obliterated."

[jwolf]

Why do I want these islands? They are on my LOC, of course, but beyond that they hold more than a half million enemy troops.

If you succeed in taking Ketoi, won't that clear your LOC? If so, then the only reason to take the more northern islands is for the points claimed in destroying the enemy ground units. Those points would be significant, but they won't run away from you. You could wait for the spring weather and land then, using the winter for other operations.

[Canoerebel]

10/26/44

Ketoi: The CA bombardments are having little effect. I'd devote them to other duties, except it's possible that they help maintain disruption levels between the BB bombardment runs.

[Canoerebel]

ORIGINAL: jwolf

Why do I want these islands? They are on my LOC, of course, but beyond that they hold more than a half million enemy troops.

If you succeed in taking Ketoi, won't that clear your LOC? If so, then the only reason to take the more northern islands is for the points claimed in destroying the enemy ground units. Those points would be significant, but they won't run away from you. You could wait for the spring weather and land then, using the winter for other operations.

That only clears a narrow passage. I want much broader shoulders than that. As for ground targets, preparation time enters into things too. I have troops prepped for all the Kuriles from Urupp north, so that's a key factor in deciding what to take on when and where.

[Canoerebel]

10/26/44

Ketoi: Another threat helping make these dangerous waters.

[Canoerebel]

10/26/44

Ketoi: I think this is the critter that obliterated that LCI(G).