
Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)
Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition
RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)
Need to wrap this up, was hoping Clark would fall today.


- Attachments
-
- manila.jpg (64.61 KiB) Viewed 328 times
RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)
Ceylon is almost fully evacuated, it is just too far away to hold.
Troops are 100% prepped for Darwin, Midway, but not Port Moresby. Of the three I really am only tempted to take Midway, but with the recent developments might revisit that.
Short term I want to wipe out American troops in Aleutians and Tabby, but then pull back to a shorter perimeter.
Troops are 100% prepped for Darwin, Midway, but not Port Moresby. Of the three I really am only tempted to take Midway, but with the recent developments might revisit that.
Short term I want to wipe out American troops in Aleutians and Tabby, but then pull back to a shorter perimeter.
RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)
ORIGINAL: Lowpe
Ceylon is almost fully evacuated, it is just too far away to hold.
Troops are 100% prepped for Darwin, Midway, but not Port Moresby. Of the three I really am only tempted to take Midway, but with the recent developments might revisit that.
Short term I want to wipe out American troops in Aleutians and Tabby, but then pull back to a shorter perimeter.
Ceylon is almost fully evacuated ? This open road to Sumatra invasion ;(. Anyway Mike is going hit you for real in DEI. He does not like islands-south-central pacific way.
RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)
ORIGINAL: MrKane
Ceylon is almost fully evacuated ? This open road to Sumatra invasion ;(. Anyway Mike is going hit you for real in DEI. He does not like islands-south-central pacific way.
This is a scenario 1 game, and to my thinking, Japan simply isn't strong enough to hold Ceylon, without giving up too much elsewhere.
Thanks, I thought he might be coming SRA somewhere, or New Guinea.
RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)
ORIGINAL: Lowpe
ORIGINAL: MrKane
Ceylon is almost fully evacuated ? This open road to Sumatra invasion ;(. Anyway Mike is going hit you for real in DEI. He does not like islands-south-central pacific way.
This is a scenario 1 game, and to my thinking, Japan simply isn't strong enough to hold Ceylon, without giving up too much elsewhere.
Thanks, I thought he might be coming SRA somewhere, or New Guinea.
In our current game he has pushed by vectors: Darwin-Borneo, Darwin-Java and next Java-Malaya Borneo-Mindano. Marianas and Rabaul are empty and Mike did show up nearby whole game.
RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)
The KB, in the Aleutians, where all Japanese bases are size 0 runways, took replacements.
Zuiho-1/C at CV Soryu takes A6M2 Zero replacements
Akagi-3 at CV Akagi takes B5N2 Kate replacements
Kaga-3 at CV Kaga takes B5N2 Kate replacements
Soryu-1 at CV Soryu takes A6M2 Zero replacements
Soryu-3 at CV Soryu takes B5N2 Kate replacements
Hiryu-1 at CVE Hosho takes A6M2 Zero replacements
Shokaku-3 at CV Akagi takes B5N2 Kate replacements
Zuikaku-1 at CVL Zuiho takes A6M2 Zero replacements
Now, they are many hexes from Paramushiro...so I am guessing that is where the planes came from, but Para doesn't have 20,000 supplies and one more but there is an Air HQ there.
Of interest, at the port size 1, where the KB is there are some AKEs. Can AKE's provide the supply source for generating plane replacements?
Now, in reading the manual[X(], I came across why I don't use automatic replacements for land based air (only ship based units). Sometimes this effect of this rule is to have fighters in Burma generating splinter groups of 12 at Tokyo.[X(]

Zuiho-1/C at CV Soryu takes A6M2 Zero replacements
Akagi-3 at CV Akagi takes B5N2 Kate replacements
Kaga-3 at CV Kaga takes B5N2 Kate replacements
Soryu-1 at CV Soryu takes A6M2 Zero replacements
Soryu-3 at CV Soryu takes B5N2 Kate replacements
Hiryu-1 at CVE Hosho takes A6M2 Zero replacements
Shokaku-3 at CV Akagi takes B5N2 Kate replacements
Zuikaku-1 at CVL Zuiho takes A6M2 Zero replacements
Now, they are many hexes from Paramushiro...so I am guessing that is where the planes came from, but Para doesn't have 20,000 supplies and one more but there is an Air HQ there.
Of interest, at the port size 1, where the KB is there are some AKEs. Can AKE's provide the supply source for generating plane replacements?
Now, in reading the manual[X(], I came across why I don't use automatic replacements for land based air (only ship based units). Sometimes this effect of this rule is to have fighters in Burma generating splinter groups of 12 at Tokyo.[X(]

- Attachments
-
- manila.jpg (41.02 KiB) Viewed 328 times
RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)
I can tell you for a fact that I do not fully understand the replacements code. As you note above, you are getting replacements where you might expect not to, and other times where I think I should, I cannot. This is not a 90% problem, this is a 1 or 2% problem, maybe less. Meaning, most of the time everything is fine. Then a turn like yours above will happen and I'm mystified … [X(][X(][X(]
[8D]
[8D]
Pax
RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)
I think the difficult to determine factor is a combination of HQs both Air HQ and Command HQ.
RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)
This game has been super frustrating at putting the hurt on Allied planes at ports...but Japan finally pulls off a decent bombardment, at an over stacked island.


- Attachments
-
- manila.jpg (56.97 KiB) Viewed 328 times
RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)
China
June has been a super tough month for the Chinese losing several thousand squads.
One of the justifications of stacking limits is to slow down the conquest of China, but what happens in practice is that it usually accelerates the fall.
Once the initial position is broken, the Chinese retreat back along the road seriously over stacking the next position draining the troops of supply and increasing the effectiveness of Japanese aerial bombing and land bombardment.
And when the fight gets to Chungking, it is so overstacked a successful defense is almost impossible to achieve.
This particular mod has given the Chinese Corp an enhanced anti-tank capability, but generally speaking the overstack penalty once activates simply snowballs and wipes out a defensive line very quickly.
Pictured below the Japanese schwerpunkt pushes thru the mountains, and should be forcing the Kienko river crossing in less than a month (perhaps as soon as 2 weeks) and then onto the central plains.
Japanese Deliberate attack
Attacking force 17102 troops, 229 guns, 591 vehicles, Assault Value = 575
Defending force 40241 troops, 343 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 771
Japanese adjusted assault: 252
Allied adjusted defense: 109
Japanese assault odds: 2 to 1
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), disruption(-), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker:
Japanese ground losses:
163 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 18 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 17 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Allied ground losses:
14914 casualties reported
Squads: 374 destroyed, 60 disabled
Non Combat: 472 destroyed, 33 disabled
Engineers: 10 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 121 (120 destroyed, 1 disabled)
Units retreated 11
Defeated Allied Units Retreating!
Assaulting units:
9th Tank Regiment
3rd Tank Regiment
12th Tank Regiment
23rd Tank Regiment
13th Tank Regiment
40th Division
15th Tank Regiment
11th Tank Regiment
7th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
52nd Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion
2nd Ind. Mountain Gun Regiment
1st Mortar Battalion
8th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
1st Army
6th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
5th Ind.Hvy.Art Battalion
Defending units:
80th Chinese Corps
76th Chinese Corps
13th Chinese Corps
90th Chinese Corps
4th Heavy Mortar Regiment
Jingcha War Area
3rd Heavy Mortar Regiment
41st AA Regiment
57th AT Gun Regiment
22nd Group Army
56th AT Gun Regiment

June has been a super tough month for the Chinese losing several thousand squads.
One of the justifications of stacking limits is to slow down the conquest of China, but what happens in practice is that it usually accelerates the fall.
Once the initial position is broken, the Chinese retreat back along the road seriously over stacking the next position draining the troops of supply and increasing the effectiveness of Japanese aerial bombing and land bombardment.
And when the fight gets to Chungking, it is so overstacked a successful defense is almost impossible to achieve.
This particular mod has given the Chinese Corp an enhanced anti-tank capability, but generally speaking the overstack penalty once activates simply snowballs and wipes out a defensive line very quickly.
Pictured below the Japanese schwerpunkt pushes thru the mountains, and should be forcing the Kienko river crossing in less than a month (perhaps as soon as 2 weeks) and then onto the central plains.
Japanese Deliberate attack
Attacking force 17102 troops, 229 guns, 591 vehicles, Assault Value = 575
Defending force 40241 troops, 343 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 771
Japanese adjusted assault: 252
Allied adjusted defense: 109
Japanese assault odds: 2 to 1
Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), disruption(-), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker:
Japanese ground losses:
163 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 18 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 17 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Allied ground losses:
14914 casualties reported
Squads: 374 destroyed, 60 disabled
Non Combat: 472 destroyed, 33 disabled
Engineers: 10 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 121 (120 destroyed, 1 disabled)
Units retreated 11
Defeated Allied Units Retreating!
Assaulting units:
9th Tank Regiment
3rd Tank Regiment
12th Tank Regiment
23rd Tank Regiment
13th Tank Regiment
40th Division
15th Tank Regiment
11th Tank Regiment
7th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
52nd Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion
2nd Ind. Mountain Gun Regiment
1st Mortar Battalion
8th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
1st Army
6th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
5th Ind.Hvy.Art Battalion
Defending units:
80th Chinese Corps
76th Chinese Corps
13th Chinese Corps
90th Chinese Corps
4th Heavy Mortar Regiment
Jingcha War Area
3rd Heavy Mortar Regiment
41st AA Regiment
57th AT Gun Regiment
22nd Group Army
56th AT Gun Regiment

- Attachments
-
- manila.jpg (191.47 KiB) Viewed 328 times
RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)
+1ORIGINAL: Lowpe
One of the justifications of stacking limits is to slow down the conquest of China, but what happens in practice is that it usually accelerates the fall.
Once the initial position is broken, the Chinese retreat back along the road seriously over stacking the next position draining the troops of supply and increasing the effectiveness of Japanese aerial bombing and land bombardment.
And when the fight gets to Chungking, it is so overstacked a successful defense is almost impossible to achieve.
My assessment as well.
My question |(to myself) is: Is this accurate? Is the issue that a player does not fight to control 2 or 3 hexes around CK? I am still debating this …
I'm doing comparisons against historical encirclements of the era (necessarily on the Eastern Front). Slow process as my time is limited ...
Pax
RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)
ORIGINAL: Lowpe
China
June has been a super tough month for the Chinese losing several thousand squads.
One of the justifications of stacking limits is to slow down the conquest of China, but what happens in practice is that it usually accelerates the fall.
Once the initial position is broken, the Chinese retreat back along the road seriously over stacking the next position draining the troops of supply and increasing the effectiveness of Japanese aerial bombing and land bombardment.
And when the fight gets to Chungking, it is so overstacked a successful defense is almost impossible to achieve.
This particular mod has given the Chinese Corp an enhanced anti-tank capability, but generally speaking the overstack penalty once activates simply snowballs and wipes out a defensive line very quickly.
I find SL make defending in good territory much more effective for the Chinese. If they do have to retreat, ideally there would be dug in troops behind, and as the retreated troops move back, the hex would again be under SL and the dug in troops able to stand.
Unless the Allied player is caught out, and didn't prepare multiple lines behind the front, SL alone should not make China harder to defend.
Against Greyjoy my Chinese managed to push back and crush a shock into Sian, and that was successful mainly because he didn't want to overstock his troops shocking over. Without SL he might have used double the troops and gotten a decent result and pushed everything back in a few days. The offensive player can always add more than the defender in a chosen hex without SL, and that makes defending really tough. You just can't move troops onto the front or behind to cover the next hexes before the attacker has broken through and moved into the rear reserve.
I found there that when frontline troops were tired, I could fairly easily trade them out since they would have had their SL reduced and the new unit would only overstack for a day or so, thus not losing supply.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)
ORIGINAL: obvert
ORIGINAL: Lowpe
China
June has been a super tough month for the Chinese losing several thousand squads.
One of the justifications of stacking limits is to slow down the conquest of China, but what happens in practice is that it usually accelerates the fall.
Once the initial position is broken, the Chinese retreat back along the road seriously over stacking the next position draining the troops of supply and increasing the effectiveness of Japanese aerial bombing and land bombardment.
And when the fight gets to Chungking, it is so overstacked a successful defense is almost impossible to achieve.
This particular mod has given the Chinese Corp an enhanced anti-tank capability, but generally speaking the overstack penalty once activates simply snowballs and wipes out a defensive line very quickly.
I find SL make defending in good territory much more effective for the Chinese. If they do have to retreat, ideally there would be dug in troops behind, and as the retreated troops move back, the hex would again be under SL and the dug in troops able to stand.
Unless the Allied player is caught out, and didn't prepare multiple lines behind the front, SL alone should not make China harder to defend.
Against Greyjoy my Chinese managed to push back and crush a shock into Sian, and that was successful mainly because he didn't want to overstock his troops shocking over. Without SL he might have used double the troops and gotten a decent result and pushed everything back in a few days. The offensive player can always add more than the defender in a chosen hex without SL, and that makes defending really tough. You just can't move troops onto the front or behind to cover the next hexes before the attacker has broken through and moved into the rear reserve.
I found there that when frontline troops were tired, I could fairly easily trade them out since they would have had their SL reduced and the new unit would only overstack for a day or so, thus not losing supply.
I do not like it anymore
RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)
ORIGINAL: MrKane
I do not like it anymore. SL is working always for stronger side in my opinion. It using men number as limitation and does not take in count real value(fire power value) of squad. Basically on beginning it allows bring more fire power in hex for Japanese side and later on it allows to do the same trick for allied player.
Certainly it benefits the side that can stuff in non-manpower based firepower like art and arm.
But I am not sure super stacks and no stacking limits are better. They both require different approaches. I don't think there is a "right" answer in selecting one over the other.
RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)
ORIGINAL: obvert
I find SL make defending in good territory much more effective for the Chinese. If they do have to retreat, ideally there would be dug in troops behind, and as the retreated troops move back, the hex would again be under SL and the dug in troops able to stand.
Unless the Allied player is caught out, and didn't prepare multiple lines behind the front, SL alone should not make China harder to defend.
Against Greyjoy my Chinese managed to push back and crush a shock into Sian, and that was successful mainly because he didn't want to overstock his troops shocking over. Without SL he might have used double the troops and gotten a decent result and pushed everything back in a few days. The offensive player can always add more than the defender in a chosen hex without SL, and that makes defending really tough. You just can't move troops onto the front or behind to cover the next hexes before the attacker has broken through and moved into the rear reserve.
I found there that when frontline troops were tired, I could fairly easily trade them out since they would have had their SL reduced and the new unit would only overstack for a day or so, thus not losing supply.
Well, you hit upon player skill here I think. In this particular game, I think Wargamr wrote off China after the fall of Sian and pays scant attention here. And SL games require that you pay close attention and plan several steps ahead.
I don't think anyone has pulled off a snowball attack against you in China, I certainly didn't.[:)]
RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)
ORIGINAL: PaxMondo
+1
My assessment as well.
My question |(to myself) is: Is this accurate? Is the issue that a player does not fight to control 2 or 3 hexes around CK? I am still debating this …
I'm doing comparisons against historical encirclements of the era (necessarily on the Eastern Front). Slow process as my time is limited ...
Really, there are only two hexes around Chungking that are defensible, the two w-r hexes to the south. And I agree they are key to defending Chungking or at least prolonging the defense.
I think a lot of the problem, whether SL or not, is that simply the Allied players personal morale breaks in China and the quality of their play there deteriorates. I absolutely love Mr.Kanes tactic of a huge air re-supply of China and really would wish that more Allied players did this.
I think China could last much longer if Japan only used artillery 15cm and smaller there, and limited the number of tanks regiments sent. If the Manchuko Garrison required a set number of artillery and armor units there, in addition to raw AV that would do something...most likely free up PP to be spent on Manchuko bombers sooner (the law of unintended consequences at work).
It is a devious circle of workarounds.
RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)
ORIGINAL: Lowpe
Really, there are only two hexes around Chungking that are defensible, the two w-r hexes to the south. And I agree they are key to defending Chungking or at least prolonging the defense.
Except for a breakthrough from the east near Sian.
I think a lot of the problem, whether SL or not, is that simply the Allied players personal morale breaks in China and the quality of their play there deteriorates. I absolutely love Mr.Kanes tactic of a huge air re-supply of China and really would wish that more Allied players did this.
Definitely interesting. It requires trade-offs as everything does.
I think China could last much longer if Japan only used artillery 15cm and smaller there, and limited the number of tanks regiments sent. If the Manchuko Garrison required a set number of artillery and armor units there, in addition to raw AV that would do something...most likely free up PP to be spent on Manchuko bombers sooner (the law of unintended consequences at work).
I would not favor any HR's on this, but I agree it would be nice if the Manchukuo Garrison required certain weight of artillery and armour.
It is a devious circle of workarounds.
Yup!
Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home
RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)
ORIGINAL: Lowpe
ORIGINAL: MrKane
I do not like it anymore. SL is working always for stronger side in my opinion. It using men number as limitation and does not take in count real value(fire power value) of squad. Basically on beginning it allows bring more fire power in hex for Japanese side and later on it allows to do the same trick for allied player.
Certainly it benefits the side that can stuff in non-manpower based firepower like art and arm.
But I am not sure super stacks and no stacking limits are better. They both require different approaches. I don't think there is a "right" answer in selecting one over the other.
"Super stacks" can be outmaneuvered. I encourage everyone to get better at their hex and hexside management.
RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)
ORIGINAL: witpqs
Really, there are only two hexes around Chungking that are defensible, the two w-r hexes to the south. And I agree they are key to defending Chungking or at least prolonging the defense.
Except for a breakthrough from the east near Sian.
Especially important against a Sian based schwerpunkt.
RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)
Nagato, stricken by two destroyer torpedoes, makes port and will be tied up in repairs for a long time.
The Tabby counter invasion is close, perhaps 1-2 weeks away. I have never attempted such a large counter landing before, but they defenders are being pummeled by warships daily. Still it is an atoll landing and they can be quite devastating.
In the Aleutians, forces are still arriving and I suspect we are a month away from landings on Adak, but perhaps only two weeks till we land on Attu.
First attacks on Bataan in a day or two, and once it falls the troops will be released for Darwin and Port Moresby or elsewhere. Perth looks attractive. Or perhaps nowhere.
The Tabby counter invasion is close, perhaps 1-2 weeks away. I have never attempted such a large counter landing before, but they defenders are being pummeled by warships daily. Still it is an atoll landing and they can be quite devastating.
In the Aleutians, forces are still arriving and I suspect we are a month away from landings on Adak, but perhaps only two weeks till we land on Attu.
First attacks on Bataan in a day or two, and once it falls the troops will be released for Darwin and Port Moresby or elsewhere. Perth looks attractive. Or perhaps nowhere.





