Matrix Games Forums

Going to take Palmyra as my next step the softening process has startted
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Kure 7th SNLF, at 170,133 (Palmyra)

Weather in hex: Severe storms

Raid detected at 79 NM, estimated altitude 18,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 34 minutes


Allied aircraft
Avenger II x 24
Barracuda II x 24
Corsair II x 47
F4U-1A Corsair x 85
F6F-3 Hellcat x 21
SB2C-1C Helldiver x 62
TBM-1C Avenger x 57


Allied aircraft losses
SB2C-1C Helldiver: 2 damaged
TBM-1C Avenger: 1 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
208 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
Non Combat: 4 destroyed, 20 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 8 (1 destroyed, 7 disabled)

I am going to experiment at Palmyra

Can a Regt+Tk Bn backed by a full carrier force take an atoll.

If yes it will make a huge difference to the Marshall/Gilbert campaign

Given KB is off in SWPAC I have a few days to test the concept plus Xmas Island AF to ensure if I need to bring in more force I can

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

I am going to experiment at Palmyra

Can a Regt+Tk Bn backed by a full carrier force take an atoll.

If yes it will make a huge difference to the Marshall/Gilbert campaign

Given KB is off in SWPAC I have a few days to test the concept plus Xmas Island AF to ensure if I need to bring in more force I can

That only depends on what PzB has there. By now I would expect some 100-150 av behind level 4 or 5 forts. He can´t go much higher in av I guess as stacking limits would make that impossible so an enemy rgt with some kind of base force to provide air support would be what I would expect. Have you done any recon so far?

If you don´t want to do a hush rush invasion then I think a rgt and a tk btn should be enough if fully prepped because using a good amount of carrier air for a week on ground attacks should reduce his av to 10% of what he has there to start with. IMO, those 6000 stacking limit atolls can´t be held by either side if one side wants to take them, the IJ early on and the Allied later. If you rush in, drop your troops on the second day I would give you a chance of 1% to achieve something. Nevertheless, I would have always tasked a division for such an operation.

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

I am going to experiment at Palmyra

Can a Regt+Tk Bn backed by a full carrier force take an atoll.

If yes it will make a huge difference to the Marshall/Gilbert campaign

Given KB is off in SWPAC I have a few days to test the concept plus Xmas Island AF to ensure if I need to bring in more force I can

As castor said, depends on the situation. If you can heavily supress the island it might be possible. As soon as you have captured the first island, put 2 or 3 AKE there and use a surface force from there too to supress the islands.

I always pick an army division from an 6k stacking limit base to be on the safe side, but a rgt + some armored stuff might be enough. Only take the sherman bdes as their combat power is much greater than the previous stuff. Other problem might be the combat engineers to take down the forts. I experiences even with an army divisions against a 100 or so defender AV behind lvl 5+ forts on an atoll that i needed often 3 or 4 days to take the island. With 2-3 4+ BB/CA TFs bombarding and a the full allied carrier force doing ground attacks.

the goal for me would be to

a) get info on what actually is there (don´t put your recon on recon/Palmyra but recon/commander decisionm with range limited to reach Palmyra - if recon ac can´t get there use a B-29) and even if you don´t get a high detection die roll for recon, that doesn´t matter because if you don´t put the BASE as target you will see "B-29 takes photograph of xy enemy unit" so after a couple of recon flights to Palmyra you know exactly what he has there. With the units being identified it´s easily to get a picture of how much av is there.

b) after identifying the enemy av there you can perfectly time your invasion by knocking down his av with A2G attacks day after day (if you want to do that). Enemy got 150 av there, every day A2G attacks take out 25 of his av. Result, a week or air attacks whipes out more or less all enemy resistance. Then send in your troops and take the trashed place. So far a 6000 stacking limit atoll never proved to be a problem for me doing it that way. Add in your B-29 or other bombers that might be in range and it should be in fact pretty easy going to be honest.

Have about 4 days before my phibs arrive full CAG's hitting them until then - have a Regt/Eng Regt and Tank Bn assault loaded

About 9,000 men on the atoll so they chould be getting hungry !!!

I have Christmas so recon is not a problem

Kind of busy at work.

Supply situation in Burma critical I brough in heavies to early having to evac all the 24's back to India until some major convoys arrive.

Invading Palmyra in a few days no sign of the Japanese yet B29's on LR Search just in case and a heavy sub screen out

ORIGINAL: castor troy

the goal for me would be to

a) get info on what actually is there (don´t put your recon on recon/Palmyra but recon/commander decisionm with range limited to reach Palmyra - if recon ac can´t get there use a B-29) and even if you don´t get a high detection die roll for recon, that doesn´t matter because if you don´t put the BASE as target you will see "B-29 takes photograph of xy enemy unit" so after a couple of recon flights to Palmyra you know exactly what he has there. With the units being identified it´s easily to get a picture of how much av is there.

Slick trick. Once again, I have sat at the feet of the master.....[&o] I can't wait to try it out.

But his air ground attacks should reveal the targets once the detection level gets up. You know. "Attacking X unit. Also attacking Y, Z and so on.

ORIGINAL: crsutton

ORIGINAL: castor troy

the goal for me would be to

a) get info on what actually is there (don´t put your recon on recon/Palmyra but recon/commander decisionm with range limited to reach Palmyra - if recon ac can´t get there use a B-29) and even if you don´t get a high detection die roll for recon, that doesn´t matter because if you don´t put the BASE as target you will see "B-29 takes photograph of xy enemy unit" so after a couple of recon flights to Palmyra you know exactly what he has there. With the units being identified it´s easily to get a picture of how much av is there.

Slick trick. Once again, I have sat at the feet of the master.....[&o] I can't wait to try it out.

But his air ground attacks should reveal the targets once the detection level gets up. You know. "Attacking X unit. Also attacking Y, Z and so on.

of course, but I usually want to know it BEFORE my carriers park next door... [;)] because at the time the carriers sit nearby, my invasion usually is too or is just about to arrive.

There is no need to identify the individual units. The aggregated troop number divided by 30 will give you a very good and close approximation of the unadjusted assault value of the garrison.

Alfred

ORIGINAL: Alfred

There is no need to identify the individual units. The aggregated troop number divided by 30 will give you a very good and close approximation of the unadjusted assault value of the garrison.

Alfred

I might be confusied but I find BF's and Construction Units add to troop totals and thus inflate AV numbers using that formula. Maybe the trick is to subtract out BF's and CU's to get a feel for the real troop size? Also I thought armored units for example can inflate AV? Unless just getting a SWAG is enough to get what is needed ...given XXXXX troops the maximum AV possible is YYY ...?

Not a material concern. Just relying on the 1:30 rule of thumb I regularly achieve a 95-99% accuracy.

Sure units with very small assault value but a large non combat tail will inflate the troop numbers present. But that is counterbalanced by the presence of AFVs which are separate from the disclosed troop numbers. This will only be an issue if there is an inordinately large number of AFVs present, and if so you just add them on a 1:1 basis to the calculation. Plus none of this properly factors in artillery tubes who contribute nothing to assault value but can have a huge impact on the fire fight.

Also troop numbers provides a good approximation of the type of force structure present. A base with between 16-18k troops has the equivalent of a division present. If the disclosed information shows that many troops but a very high number of V (air support) or E (engineers) etc then you can just adjust your expectations down to the garrison being comprised primarily of support units.

Besides the point I am making is that for the purposes of determining what is present on an atoll before it is invaded, knowing the name of the unit present is of not much value and definitely inferior to my 1:30 rule of thumb.

1. The indentified unit could have fragments scattered all over the map. Knowing the name of the unit only tells you that at least 51% of the unit, ie the parent, is present. If the name clearly identifies it is only a fragment present, then you have no idea whether that fragment constitues 1% or 49% of the aggregated unit combat power.

2. As it has often been said, far too much weight is given to unadjusted assault values. What really counts is the firepower. Only at the end of the firefight, after all the modifiers have been applied, does the adjusted assault value come into play for one thing only, to determine whether the base changes hands.

3. With all the modifers present, many of which can not be accurately taken into account by the player beforehand (for example just how much supply does the enemy unit have or what is the exact fortification level) the wise attacker builds in a safety margin of error.

Alfred

ORIGINAL: Alfred

... the wise attacker builds in a safety margin of error.

Alfred

Ergo, the oftimes quoted 3:1 minimum for an attacker, 4:1 whenever you can! [;)]

I am expecting an easy fight to be honest as my air units have trashed the defenders and my bombers will have killed most of the supply (plus his overstack)

Last few days have progressed as planned

Palmyra fell on day 2 relativelly easily

An attack by Barge on Gasmata should secure the base in a day or two knocked th eforts right down - cost me a few barges but worth it.

I want to keep hitting hm with these nibbling attacks until I am ready for my next big effort

Gasmata is mine lost a few barges taking the place but I now own Gasmata

Amercal are attacking Salamua tomorrow

503rd Para Regt have now arrived in theatre and are at PM and will be used soon

In general things are progressing nicely as I advance

In CENTPAC invasion force is almost at Canton Island and should land tomorrow heavy sub screen is out as is most of my carrier force.

In Burma 3 mega convoys have delivered 0.5m suply to Rangoon safely so I can start to bring back the Heavies

Andy

Not going to say a lot just been fucked by the game again

Tried an attack in Bay of bengal

Was ready in position took my licks but then guess what not a single fucking man landed despite being set to absoulute do not retire or I will crucify every sailor in the fleet

2 Destroyers get in amongst them and a 5 Div assault fleet with over 20 escorting warships turns and runs despite the presence of seperate SCTF's

Next day same thing and again not a single fucking man lands

The casualties are not this issue I was willing and expecting to take losses but to not land a signel man is a fucking joke.

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Not going to say a lot just been fucked by the game again

Tried an attack in Bay of bengal

Was ready in position took my licks but then guess what not a single fucking man landed despite being set to absoulute do not retire or I will crucify every sailor in the fleet

2 Destroyers get in amongst them and a 5 Div assault fleet with over 20 escorting warships turns and runs despite the presence of seperate SCTF's

Next day same thing and again not a single fucking man lands

The casualties are not this issue I was willing and expecting to take losses but to not land a signel man is a fucking joke.

Blame the Devs, a bit of self flaggelation helps!

I never noticed before, but when I quote your rant it puts back your original spelling[:D]
 
At least it was a quality swearing piece, not an Eddie Murphy every second word!