A strategic question

[Hortlund]

Well, I was looking over the positions now, and Im going to mount one more offensive in the centpac. I'll take Baker island, and have Tarawa as the center-hub of the Baker-Tarawa-Funafti-area. I'll fill all the atolls with at least 100 combat values and CDs. I'll probably stick an artillery unit and two AA units on each atoll too. I'll bring those in from the russian front. That should prove a tough nut to crack for him. After that, Im going over on the defensive on all fronts except china.

[Grotius]

Sounds good.

The only reason I ask about the north is that once he makes that long hop to your northernmost base (whose name I forget), doesn't he have a much shorter road to the Home Islands? In fact, won't he eventually be able to bomb the Home Islands from that northernmost base? I'm not saying you should aim to conquer Anchorage; just wondering whether a little buffer zone here might discourage him from going that way. Then again, perhaps you sense that he's already not inclined to go that way.

[Hortlund]

Paramushiro Jima is the northernmost Japanese base closest to the Auletians.
 
Yes, it is bad if he gets a hold up there, so I will definitively fight him for it if he tries. However, the area north of a certian hexrow is in arctic weather, and during the winter half of the year its almost impossible to fly from those bases. Cant remember the exact details, I just know its bad.
 
If he goes there, I will be able to use my navy to pound the allied bases, his aircover will be sporadic, he will be at the very end of a long supply-chain and Im gonna be right in my own back yard.
 
One thing to consider however, is the risk for an attack on the northern home-island. Cant remember its name, but there are some industry up there.

[Feinder]

If you can afford the offense, there's much to be said for simply expanding your perimeter (say going after Canton/Palmyra as well as Baker), and then simply defending the minimally.
 
Defending Canton/Palmyra would be difficult, so don't.  Just capture them, to force the Allies to retake them.  You don't have to garrison them with much, just a fragment of a Bde with about 500 troops.  Enough that he's going to have to prep an RCT to kick you out, but not enough troops that you actually care.  There's nothing wrong with defending -inside- the permiter, and having some of the bases on the perimeter as empty shell.
 
But if you make him prep a whole RCT to to attack a base that he cares about (and you don't), you've just put that RCT on the shelf 2 - 3 months (the time it takes him to prep, and then invade).
 
Having a few "I don't care by my enemy will want them" bases scattered around, also gives you opportunity to strike - since you know he's going to want it, you can be ready when he does, or you can completely disregard the recapture, because you don't care anyway.
 
-F-
 
-F-

[Feinder]

One thing to consider however, is the risk for an attack on the northern home-island. Cant remember its name, but there are some industry up there.

Toyohara - I just bombed it in my own PBEM game (Jan 42). There's another group factories beside Ominato that is a tempting target as well.

-F-

[Hortlund]

ORIGINAL: Feinder

If you can afford the offense, there's much to be said for simply expanding your perimeter (say going after Canton/Palmyra as well as Baker), and then simply defending the minimally.

Defending Canton/Palmyra would be difficult, so don't.  Just capture them, to force the Allies to retake them.  You don't have to garrison them with much, just a fragment of a Bde with about 500 troops.  Enough that he's going to have to prep an RCT to kick you out, but not enough troops that you actually care.  There's nothing wrong with defending -inside- the permiter, and having some of the bases on the perimeter as empty shell.

But if you make him prep a whole RCT to to attack a base that he cares about (and you don't), you've just put that RCT on the shelf 2 - 3 months (the time it takes him to prep, and then invade).

Having a few "I don't care by my enemy will want them" bases scattered around, also gives you opportunity to strike - since you know he's going to want it, you can be ready when he does, or you can completely disregard the recapture, because you don't care anyway.

-F-

-F-

Well, I have the troops to do it. Right now Im shifting three divisions from Rangoon to the centpac. I decided to go over on the defensive in Burma and not try for India.

But is it worth it? If I go after Canton Island or Palmyra, Im bound to run into CVs and BBs. I think I would win any such exchange, but I would probably lose one CV...if I come with the full might of the KB and face two or three US CVs, I would sink them, but probably lose one myself.

Is it worth it? I really think the best use of the KB for me now is to make it invisible. Heck I could anchor them at Tokyo...if I do that they will remain a phantom in the allied players head. He will never know when they'll show up, and therefore he will have to be much more careful than he'd otherwise be.

[veji1]

You want to run into CVs and BBs now !!! not in 6 months or a year time.

This is why you have to go for him en force, if you don't dent his offensive capabilities while you can, you will regret it.

[AmiralLaurent]

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

Paramushiro Jima is the northernmost Japanese base closest to the Auletians.

Yes, it is bad if he gets a hold up there, so I will definitively fight him for it if he tries. However, the area north of a certian hexrow is in arctic weather, and during the winter half of the year its almost impossible to fly from those bases. Cant remember the exact details, I just know its bad.

If he goes there, I will be able to use my navy to pound the allied bases, his aircover will be sporadic, he will be at the very end of a long supply-chain and Im gonna be right in my own back yard.

One thing to consider however, is the risk for an attack on the northern home-island. Cant remember its name, but there are some industry up there.

Don't except the artic weather to protect your northern front... it is as bas simulated as the monsoon in Burma... it will reduce the level of air activity but aircraft will still fly around 50% of the time.. instead of a probable 10% IRL.... and ships won't be much damaged by it... so an operation in the area in winter is fairly doable.

As for the supply chain, Aleutians are closer from the West Coast than the Solomons... and in WITP there is no problem landing a million supplies on Attu and Kiska and wage a major operation from here. So the northern flank is a major option for the Allied.

On the other hand the Allied attacking there early will come to play on the Japanese ground. Japanese supply line will be very short, with repair yards, big bases and big ports in the area. And last but not least Japan can't afford an Allied success here so will commit all his forces there. IMOO the Allied player may attack in 1942 but not where it hurts Japan the most... Allied forces can win local superiority but not if Japan in 42 gathers all its might at one place. And that is what Japan should do if PJ is invaded in 42.

So in conclusion an Allied attack on Kuriles/Sakhalin in 1942 is doable and defensive measures (or offensive ones with an invasion of the Aleutian Islands) should be taken, but I will launch such an attack only if most of the Japanese power will be involved in operations thousand of miles away (lile an invasion of NZ).

[Hortlund]

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent

Don't except the artic weather to protect your northern front... it is as bas simulated as the monsoon in Burma... it will reduce the level of air activity but aircraft will still fly around 50% of the time.. instead of a probable 10% IRL.... and ships won't be much damaged by it... so an operation in the area in winter is fairly doable.

As for the supply chain, Aleutians are closer from the West Coast than the Solomons... and in WITP there is no problem landing a million supplies on Attu and Kiska and wage a major operation from here. So the northern flank is a major option for the Allied.

On the other hand the Allied attacking there early will come to play on the Japanese ground. Japanese supply line will be very short, with repair yards, big bases and big ports in the area. And last but not least Japan can't afford an Allied success here so will commit all his forces there. IMOO the Allied player may attack in 1942 but not where it hurts Japan the most... Allied forces can win local superiority but not if Japan in 42 gathers all its might at one place. And that is what Japan should do if PJ is invaded in 42.

So in conclusion an Allied attack on Kuriles/Sakhalin in 1942 is doable and defensive measures (or offensive ones with an invasion of the Aleutian Islands) should be taken, but I will launch such an attack only if most of the Japanese power will be involved in operations thousand of miles away (lile an invasion of NZ).

But those 50% are on top of all other modifiers right? Or is it a 50% check and if they clear it they fly as normal? Also, isnt the weather rather bad...like rain or thunderstorms...meaning the ops losses will be nightmarish?

Also, wont the allied player have to build up the bases some before drowning them in supplies...or have I completely missunderstood the waste/spoilage-rules?

Anyway, like you say, Im not afraid of an allied venture into this area in 42 or 43...right now I can crush him at any location of the map if I put the full might of my armed forces there. I think I could even take Pearl right now if I really really wanted to..

[AmiralLaurent]

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

But those 50% are on top of all other modifiers right? Or is it a 50% check and if they clear it they fly as normal? Also, isnt the weather rather bad...like rain or thunderstorms...meaning the ops losses will be nightmarish?

No. I don't know of the check but the FINAL result of ALL checks is that bombers fly one day every two on a mean number. As for op losses they were around 1% and not significantly higher than in other area.

Bomber will fly attacks on base if their base has no cloud (for naval attack the target should also be clear) and even in thunderstorm weather it will happen 40-50% of the time according to my experience. So bombers flying will probably not be affected by bad weather for op losses.

Aircraft on CAP, LRCAP and patrol will fly even if their own base is cloud-covered and are the ones that will see op losses rising in bad weather, but again the rate won't be too bad to stop operations (CAP op loss is almost nil, patrol very low (1-2 per 1000), LRCAP more important (1-5%, but still high even in good weather)).

As I said before: moonsoon won't stop ops in Burma, and winter won't stop ops in the North.

[Grotius]

Have any of the modders addressed monsoons or arctic weather in WITP? Or is it the sort of thing that can't be modded?

[Feinder]

It has been my experience that if an air-crew has over 70 exp, they're still very likely to fly even in monsoon or blizzard.
 
When I hit Toyohara with my CV aviation, the weather was expected "Blizzard".  I figured, "Well, if I don't launch, then I won't be spotted.  If I launch, then the bombs will fall, and I'll leave.  Either way, I can stay until I launch or am spotted."
 
As we are playing 2-day turns, my planes launched both days.  While I did suffer some damages (proved in combat.txt, and fewer planes on day 2), I didn't actually lose any aircraft during the two days of strikes.
 
I bugged out after the 2nd day.
 
But as mentioned, the "foul weather" in NoPac or Burma, isn't going to stop anybody.  Frankly, I think it affects *spotting* more than anything.  But if your aircraft (or your opponent's) have over 70 exp, they're still (probably) going to launch.
 
-F-

[dtravel]

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

Also, wont the allied player have to build up the bases some before drowning them in supplies...or have I completely missunderstood the waste/spoilage-rules?

Well, the Allied player would have to build up the airfields if he wants to fly bombers out of there but as far as spoilage goes he can afford it.

[bradfordkay]

ORIGINAL: Grotius

Have any of the modders addressed monsoons or arctic weather in WITP? Or is it the sort of thing that can't be modded?

Arctic weather is modeled in the original game, with higher ops losses for aircraft and higher sys damage form ships operating in arctic areas during the months of Nov, Dec, Jan, and Feb.

Ships moving in Cold Zones (Korea, Alaska, Siberia, the Aleutians, and southern New Zealand - the latter has its Cold Zone during May, June, July and August) will suffer operational sys damage at double the normal rate.

All baze construction in cold zone winter months takes twice as long.

Air units will fly 25% fewer aircraft on strike type missions.

Ground units unloading onto enemy base/beach or non-base hexes will suffer roughly three times the losses they would normally suffer.


Manchuria is also a Cold Zone, but when I was posting the list as for ship movement it seemed silly to include it there!

[Grotius]

Yep, I was aware that arctic weather was modeled to some degree, though I'd forgotten about all the instances you mentioned in your helpful post. I've never been to Alaska, but I've had friends live and work there, and I think they'd say the "cold season" isn't long enough in WITP. I recall someone posting here in these forums that weather was an issue for aviation in the Aleutians almost year-round.