Matrix Games Forums

I think the Hawaii fighter should start with less strength.

Or very reduced readiness.

I noted above I ran three test runs last night, the full US riposte against the Japanese with air, submarine, surface units, carriers, and lost both US carriers and lots of other units on two runs but sank the Zuikaku with US landbased air on one run. I also think that is a little beyond actual US capabilities on Dec. 7. And of course you can always attack the Japanese with the interceptor unit even if you decide not to attempt a probable suicide attack with your surface ships and carriers. I don't know what the odds of the US air sinking a Japanese carrier are on that turn, but I assume it is pretty low, probably lower than 1 out of 3, but not sure. It would be interesting to hear Alvaro's thoughts on this, since it is something the US can automatically do.

I have only used the retaliatory air strike from PH a few times, still learning, but it has never damaged the IJN carriers, only inflicting air loses, with greater loss to the Allied air forces. Only persisting on the basis that the Japanese will find it harder to replace the loss.

Perhaps the Hawaiian Air Group should suffer more loss in the original attack, to better reflect the historical damage suffered on Dec 7th.

The odds are in fact pretty low, and I’ve run this scenario in various configurations probably 25 times. I’m unclear on how much the current IJN carrier capacity affects air combat. For the first half or so I ran the fighter attacks last, with the least amount of naval air resistance. But generally when attacking first, they meet up with naval air and trade hits there rather than hitting ships.

The current way the system is, you can’t get full damage on USN and air on turn one due to limited attacks. I would probably be in support of 10/20 strength on the air unit to simulate historicity without getting into more complex turn 1 exceptions.

But this is a fighter...even with 300 aircraft they don't all fly at once ever.
The assumption is about 1/2 are available at any one given time.
And from what I read the Hawaiian Air Force had about 117 planes. Most were destroyed on the ground. ​
I believe they had less than 2 dozen aircraft still good...which would make the plane have 1 to 5 str.

BUT if 1 fighter should be able to sink a carrier then the Japanese planes should sink everything in the west and they rarely ever do. In fact I never have in a dozen starts.

I attack Singapore with 2 level bombers and 1 dive bomber and never sink everything and they are in a port.

I think a house rule stating no counterattacks on the Kido Butai on turn 1 may be a requirement for PBEM games. With correct order of operations I can get a trade of 5BB's and 2DD's for 1/2CV's (assuming 4 sunk in initial raid) almost every time. In the best case scenario, showed below, after only sinking 2BB's and bottoming another at PH the sub sunk the Kirishima and the Japanese fleet was left in a crippled state in exchange for 2 DD's. No American CV's were ever at risk. As the Japanese, you can't even punish this play since you have to retreat next turn due to no supply so the small risk of losing an extra battleship in exchange for game changing CV kills and damage feels like a no brainer. These are not edge cases. I've run it 10 times with my preferred series of orders and exchanged 1-2BB's and 2DD's for at least a CV 9 times.

ORIGINAL: AllenK
perhaps some form of check could be made after the spotting round with a decreasing probability, but never 0%, of the CV launching and therefore just having a surface combat instead. CV's and BB's approaching would be 100%. Approaching CA's would probably also attract an air strike unless the screen was particularly strong in BB's and CA's. The result of adding this complexity into the calculations might not justify the effort involved, so the likelihood of launching would need to be very high if not 100% as well. CL/DD's approaching perhaps 25%. DD's down to 5% and patrol craft 1-2%? Exact values probably need some thought but you get the idea.

This sounds like an interesting and potential solution...

C

Started an AAR, look for it under After Action Reports.

As I stated in my AAR I was surprised when my turn came and the Japanese Fleet was still there. I decided to attack, thinking more like Strategic Command, and not about the possibility of the Japanese interdicting me.
I lost both the Lexington and the Enterprise and a couple of cruisers. I did little to no damage to the Japanese, all I did was damage the CA tone.

ORIGINAL: incbob

Started an AAR, look for it under After Action Reports.

As I stated in my AAR I was surprised when my turn came and the Japanese Fleet was still there. I decided to attack, thinking more like Strategic Command, and not about the possibility of the Japanese interdicting me.
I lost both the Lexington and the Enterprise and a couple of cruisers. I did little to no damage to the Japanese, all I did was damage the CA tone.

That will be the usual outcome, though there will be outliers. One of the fun things about WPP is the outliers when you get into carrier battles. Better option is to just attack with your aircraft unit and keep your ships in port. But for those determined to attack Kido Butai, use eskuche's procedure earlier in this thread.

You don't use the carriers at all, they just get sunk 90% of the time if you try to attack with them. The most effective sequence I've found is:

1)Sacrifice 2 DD groups to burn the interdiction.
2)Naval attack twice with the Hawaiian air group
3)Use the sub, it's rare but it full sinks a BC sometimes and often does 1 damage.
4)Attack with all surface ships except the carriers. Around 10% of the time they can't find the target and the DD sacrifice is for nothing but whenever they manage combat they sink 1-2 BC/CV

ORIGINAL: YueJin

You don't use the carriers at all, they just get sunk 90% of the time if you try to attack with them. The most effective sequence I've found is:

1)Sacrifice 2 DD groups to burn the interdiction.
2)Naval attack twice with the Hawaiian air group
3)Use the sub, it's rare but it full sinks a BC sometimes and often does 1 damage.
4)Attack with all surface ships except the carriers. Around 10% of the time they can't find the target and the DD sacrifice is for nothing but whenever they manage combat they sink 1-2 BC/CV

What are the usual losses to the Allies?

0-2BB's plus whatever got sunk in the initial Pearl Harbour strike, 7-8 losses on the air group but they inflict near equal damage to the carrier planes.

Two DD (~500 prod), 5-10 air, and 1-2 BB. You can keep the 1-2 HP ones in port if you’d like.

I am trying this stunt and pretty much the Allies get waxed pretty hard. I did nerf the Air unit as I forgot to deplete it for accuracy.

But I don't see how this strategy works unless you get really lucky.

Like use the air, use the 2x DD groups to soak up the interceptions, attack with the CVs, then attack with the surface and hope you get a night action and favorable result.

Still ok the Japanese might lose a CV, the USA is losing ~50 naval strength in this engagement with PH attack. That shift so early will just let them dominate completely.
Also what will you do if it doesn't work? Resign the game? That's no fun for the other guy.

Doing this gives the Japanese a 60 point advantage in naval forces. You are just asking to lose a game with this gambit.

You don't attack with the CV's. It's essentially sacrifice 2DD's for a very decent chance at sinking 2 Japanese capital ships. Using the four steps I mentioned previously I sink a CV in exchange for the 2DD's way more than 70% of the time.

This is a typical end of turn 1 screen, even if the counterattack misses and can't find the Japanese carriers I don't think losing 2 extra DD groups is something to resign over.

I’m not sure how valuable the USN is in ‘42 which is why I think trading for carriers or heck even carrier damage might be worth it, to the tune of one entire turn of IJA production per pip. The US doesn’t have to spend the production on repairing the BB damage strictly speaking and has quite a few turns to decide when to repair.

The (from a surface analysis) real immediate downside is sacrificing two DD, which may mean more lost merchant marines.

Counter to Pearl Harbor gambit. I tested it 12 times and seems to work well. Battleships got through to the carriers once. Very simple. Ring the carriers with a screening force of surface ships and submarines. Use your surface ships in the fleet to do it and the two submarines in the area. Bring in the one submarine from the Kwajalein area to finish it. If you want, you can also bring in the two cruisers from Kwajalein after your carrier strike to put some surface ships in the same hex as your carriers. I tested YueJin's gabmit against it, modified, because you have to first get through the ring, so I used half the remaining surface ships after sacrificing the two destroyer groups to try to punch a hole in the ring by sinking a screeening surface ship. The first group succeeded three times. It is a waste to send the second group if you don't punch through the screen with the first. On the three occasions I did make a hole, the second surface group was repelled and underwent a fleet retreat without getting to fire on the carriers. But on one occasion the second group did get through and sank a carrier. Others of you can further test this to see how it works for you. Might be helpful to some of you in PBEM games. As for me, I'm just not going to use it against the Japanese if I'm playing as the Allies. Personal preference. And playing as the Japanese, the Allied AI won't use it. I would be interested in Alvaro's views on the Pearl Harbor gambit. Edit - I see Alvaro commented while I was testing the counter.

I think if the allies force this kind of commitment I’d be happy to cower in the harbor for some extra turns
Currently I think it’s historically plausible and historically probably an even gamble
This IS how metagames evolve, which is usually healthy for games.

I suppose the Japanese player could always give up the second strike at PH to ensure carrier safety if the damage numbers from the first attack looked satisfying enough and it wouldn't be the end of the world. It has the benefit of getting the carriers into port at Truk on turn 2 and into the action around the DEI earlier than usual as well.

I don't think giving up the second attack is what should happen.

For me...the US should either have their oil start at 0 so they can't counter...or something needs to change.

This is quite simply gaming the system. The DD attacks are just that.

For the US to do anything realistically they would have to coordinate the attacks and since this game is step by step they are able to get around this.
I have tried a few more times and still can take out a Japanese CV with sometimes minimal losses....sometimes I lose another 4 or 5 BBs...

Not sure the BBs matter as much in the end as we know...CVs are king.


I suspect this will end up being a house rule, unless oil starts at 0 and that keeps their ships from attacking.