Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)

Post by Lowpe »

Need to wrap this up, was hoping Clark would fall today.

Image
Attachments
manila.jpg
manila.jpg (64.61 KiB) Viewed 328 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)

Post by 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.

User avatar
MrKane
Posts: 790
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2013 1:54 pm
Location: West Poland

RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)

Post by MrKane »

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.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)

Post by 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.
User avatar
MrKane
Posts: 790
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2013 1:54 pm
Location: West Poland

RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)

Post by MrKane »

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.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)

Post by Lowpe »

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(]



Image
Attachments
manila.jpg
manila.jpg (41.02 KiB) Viewed 328 times
User avatar
PaxMondo
Posts: 11130
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:23 pm

RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)

Post by PaxMondo »

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]
Pax
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)

Post by Lowpe »

I think the difficult to determine factor is a combination of HQs both Air HQ and Command HQ.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)

Post by Lowpe »

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.



Image
Attachments
manila.jpg
manila.jpg (56.97 KiB) Viewed 328 times
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)

Post by 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.

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

Image
Attachments
manila.jpg
manila.jpg (191.47 KiB) Viewed 328 times
User avatar
PaxMondo
Posts: 11130
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:23 pm

RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)

Post by PaxMondo »

ORIGINAL: 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.
+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 ...
Pax
User avatar
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)

Post by 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.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
User avatar
MrKane
Posts: 790
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2013 1:54 pm
Location: West Poland

RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)

Post by MrKane »

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 ;). 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.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)

Post by 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.

User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)

Post by Lowpe »

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.[:)]
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)

Post by Lowpe »

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.



User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)

Post by witpqs »

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!
User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9304
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)

Post by Lokasenna »

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.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)

Post by Lowpe »

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.
User avatar
Lowpe
Posts: 24582
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: Lowpe (Japan) vs Wargamr (Allies)

Post by Lowpe »

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.

Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”