Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: JohnDillworth
Well Dan, I have been dying to ask for about a year. Where you aware that John was bringing millions of gallons of fuel and oil from the DEI to Japan up until about a week ago? Huge convoys of tankers have been plowing the seas unmolested keeping the industries humming at full capacity.

Sure. John's only route of egress was through the Makassar Strait, then south of Mindanao and then north to the Home Islands. I saw each of his convoys leave. Usually they were escorted by carriers. Rarely they weren't.

You're wondering why I permitted that? The answer is complex and long, as mine often are. It's an interesting question, so I'll answer it in full shortly.

Allied objectives, from the start of the war: (1) attrition the enemy fleet; (2) interdict the flow of resources from the DEI; (3) close on the Home Islands to engage in strategic bombing. (I think I posted to that effect a dozen times in the AAR, as many of you might recall).

As Big Tent successfully unfolded in October 1943, I was in position to work on (2) but it was also clear John had gaping holes in his defenses that would allow me to achieve (3). To my way of thinking, (3) was more efficient than (2) - shooting in the head is quicker than strangling - so as long as those gaping holes existed, I steered the Allies north rather than west. Luzon was open. Coastal China was open. Formosa was open. The Shanghai region was open. Korea was open.

Bear in mind I have limited experience in the late game. I had picked up the idea from some excellent players that it was possible to score "a thousand points a day" via strategic bombing. Had I been able to achieve that kind of success, the war would've ended in early '45 (probably February) and these questions wouldn't even come up. But I couldn't achieve that, partly due to my inexperience, partly due the learning curve; partly due to John's fighters and tactics, and partly because I think bombing from Luzon and even Formosa against an an alert, experienced foe is far harder than folks think (it was for me, anyhow).

But what about all those convoys? Interdicting them would take far more time and resources than people realize and would exact an opportunity cost far greater than what I was doing. I knew I was better off with Death Star in the Yellow Sea region, handling the direct throttling of the Empire rather than working a time-consuming and possibly inefficient strangling campaign in the south. Invading Korea is simply far better than trying to stop ships in the DEI.

Detaching smaller carrier forces or combat TFs or strike aircraft wouldn't work either, at least not efficiently. John usually used carriers to escort his convoys. If I detached carriers down that way, I'd have to use overwhelming numbers or risk him consolidating and ambushing. Ditto for combat TFs. And Allied strike aircraft didn't have the numbers or range. I tried a few times and they got chewed up. I tried enough to know that devoting assets to an uncertain strangling campaign was less efficient than employing them in China and Korea where things were much more certain.

Base forces, supply, and bomber and fighter quality and pools also entered into the equation. I need supply in Korea, not at Talaud Eilenden or Morotai hoping to eventually catch some merchantmen poorly escorted.

I had 8k AV in Korea and 11k in northern China. Supporting them while also engaging in fullscale strategic bombing was an immense undertaking at the end of a supply line that stretched from San Fran to Pago Pago to Townsville to Boela to Manila to Shanghai and Gunzan. It took everything I had to keep that LOC running smoothly. And it did run smoothly but there wasn't time or assets necessary to truly interdict enemy supply/fuel in the DEI.

Ditto 4EB. I could've bombed Palembang and Balikpapan but they were well-protected. I didn't want to devote rare resources to bomb those bases, indirectly earning points, when they could be employed directly in earning points.

There are players who would've seen other ways of doing things and could've done better. But I bet there's alot of players who would've followed the siren song of sea power - wanting to use combat TFs and carriers to pursue and engage. But when the enemy leaves his heartland wide open to invasion, the job becomes moving the armies and air forces forward, and the navy's primary role becomes serving and defending rather than attacking.

That's what was going through my head.

If the game modeled the sub campaign more accurately (without the Uber-E's) you could have taken care of John's convoys with just the Secret Service.

Absolutely. I fully agree with Bullwinkle's assessment of the sub war. It's utterly nerfed in favor of Japan, but we accept that as necessary to make the game enjoyable for the Japanese player.

One reader chastised me a week or two back for my sub doctrine. That reader was wrong. You cannot employ Allied subs in waters where enemy E-class ships and air ASW are present. So I changed tactics in early '44, moving my subs to waters I controlled (against enemy raids) or in remote waters unlikely to be infested with his ASW. The cost of that was a marked decrease in attrition to enemy merchantmen. The benefit was my subs weren't wiped out and managed a number of hits on enemy capital ships, most recently CV Renkaku.

5/10/45

Perhaps the most startling graphic.

Allied Carriers Lost during the course of the War: Add to this total the RN CVE sunk on the final day of hostilities.

Death Star went deep into enemy waters many times, sometimes seeking enemy carriers but more often shepherding massive convoys to distant shores. Early in the war, the prospect of carrier action was daunting. After the Great Naval Battle of Wake Island in September 1943, the most daunting prospect was facing interlocking enemy airfields, kamikazes, and carriers. But that never happened.

I think the Great Naval Battle gave John a serious case of the yips. He never really threatened DS, though he blundered into it once (in the South China Sea in early '45).

I think he became so convinced that Death Star was an abuse that he concluded he'd never "feed his assets" to it. So he never employed kamikazees or unleashed his air force against DS, even when it approached Formosa or Shanghai or Fusan.

Once, perhaps five months back, a small enemy raid took on DS. Somehow a few strike aircraft penetrated and scored a hit on CA Pensacola. That kind of thing can happen, so the prospect of 1,000 kamikazes and strike aircraft and escorting fighters was frightening. Death Star was often within range of multiple big airfields, including the Home Islands. But John concluded that only an invasion of the Home Islands warranted triggering his kamikazes, so his empire imploded with little opposition.

An entire war fought, deep in enemy waters, and the Allies lost a single fleet carrier.

5/10/45

The second-most startling graphic, I think.

Assault Shipping Sunk: A tremendous number of risky, deep invasions resulted in only a handful of assault ships lost.

As for AKAs, two of them went under.

I believe, when you compare total ships sunk, the numbers are going to be stunning on both sides...although I suspect John lost a far greater percentage (and tonnage).

I still can't get over your ambush of John's carriers off Wake. It was nearly perfection - and it took advantage of John's inattentiveness to recon & seemingly inescapable desire to always have his carriers "doing something."

You functionally ended the war with that battle - and it was your continued masterly concentration of force and careful maintenance of your supplies lines which turned a situation (after Sumatra) which looked grim, into a brilliant victory.

I'm looking forward to reading John's version of the Great Naval Battle of Wake Island. What was his plan? Why were his carriers steaming into Indian Country without detection on mine? How'd KB get so far forward? (I recall my merchant ships east of Johnston Island suddenly reporting interaction with Jills or Judys. I simply couldn't figure it.) Apparently he didn't realize Death Star was in the Marshalls, now behind KB and in position to interdict. He's a dice roller. That one didn't pay off.

Canoe, before you even *think* of signing off: the last time you used the term "inveterate raider" I first read it as "invertebrate raider" (huh??? [:D]).

I hereby call for a session of Kangaroo Court of Inquiry into any turns of phrase, alliterations, or any other wordings of Canoerebel's which caused coffee to fly, keyboards to be thereby or otherwise become fouled, either physically, metaphysically, or metaphorically.

Congratulation to you both on concluding this epic journey!
I know it was a lot of fun to play. but it also was a lot of fun to watch. Thank you! [&o]

I put it there, I'll put it here.

It's over?

Thanks for the excellent AAR, Dan.

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Canoe, before you even *think* of signing off: the last time you used the term "inveterate raider" I first read it as "invertebrate raider" (huh??? [:D]).

I hereby call for a session of Kangaroo Court of Inquiry into any turns of phrase, alliterations, or any other wordings of Canoerebel's which caused coffee to fly, keyboards to be thereby or otherwise become fouled, either physically, metaphysically, or metaphorically.

Hah! I saw when you posted that earlier, witpqs. I should've replied then. Is "inveterate" one of those words that's too obscure for use today? Or is it a term ye forumites know well? I don't use it often, but it's great under the right circumstances, as here.

Another perfect word only to be used rarely: perturbations.

Rick Atkinson uses some magnificent words in his Liberation Trilogy. Some I know; some I don't. But I never get the feeling he's being obtuse or unclear or too smart for his own good. I get the feel that the words were impeccably selected to suit a perfect need. It makes me want to look the words up instead of throw the book into the trash. That's good writing!

ORIGINAL: crsutton
Thanks for the excellent AAR, Dan.

Thanks, Ross, for reading along since the beginning. Your insights and prognostications always seem dead on target. You are a quiet soul, but you have my complete attention.

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

It's hard for me to follow multiple games, too, DW.

Right now, Obvert vs. Lowpe has to be the "go to" game. Weird stuff going on as two exceptional players duke it out.

Thanks. I'll check it out.

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Canoe, before you even *think* of signing off: the last time you used the term "inveterate raider" I first read it as "invertebrate raider" (huh??? [:D]).

I hereby call for a session of Kangaroo Court of Inquiry into any turns of phrase, alliterations, or any other wordings of Canoerebel's which caused coffee to fly, keyboards to be thereby or otherwise become fouled, either physically, metaphysically, or metaphorically.

Hah! I saw when you posted that earlier, witpqs. I should've replied then. Is "inveterate" one of those words that's too obscure for use today? Or is it a term ye forumites know well? I don't use it often, but it's great under the right circumstances, as here.

Another perfect word only to be used rarely: perturbations.

Rick Atkinson uses some magnificent words in his Liberation Trilogy. Some I know; some I don't. But I never get the feeling he's being obtuse or unclear or too smart for his own good. I get the feel that the words were impeccably selected to suit a perfect need. It makes me want to look the words up instead of throw the book into the trash. That's good writing!

Is "inveterate" one of those words that's too obscure for use today?

Heck no!

I think it's fair to say your writing idiom is pretty much an icon around here. And a good one. Refreshing, in fact.

Sometimes, in bleary eyed or short attention-span moments, your wording leads to momentary misreadings with comical effect. You, sir, must be called to account! [:D] [:'(]

Hard to remember what I was doing in 2012 when this thing started. Greatly enjoyed the aar and your use of words like inveterate

Thanks for writing a good AAR and fighting it out until the end!

In case you want a shortcut to the Wake Island CV battle then it's here; http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=4083640

What am I now supposed to read during my lunch breaks? [:)]

Thank you for sharing your side of the struggle. Congratulations on your victory!

Dan,

Thank you for taking the time to share a tremendous game with the members of this site and congrats on the victory.

Mike