Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

I am amazed there wasn't further landings on either Hokkaido or Honshu.

besides overextending, it would also activate kamikazes. CR sofar skillfully stays out of that range

ORIGINAL: ericv

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

I am amazed there wasn't further landings on either Hokkaido or Honshu.

besides overextending, it would also activate kamikazes. CR sofar skillfully stays out of that range

Kamikazes are a vp boon for the Allies. Even when used wisely.

ORIGINAL: ericv

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

I am amazed there wasn't further landings on either Hokkaido or Honshu.

besides overextending, it would also activate kamikazes. CR sofar skillfully stays out of that range

He might not have prepped that far, or didn't want to waste prep on targets that were ready. Etorofu is low hanging fruit really. Almost half of the garrison has been removed.

I think he doesn't yet know how much these little breaks can help the Japanese regroup. He may also need it through, as the Allied air losses have been extensive lately.

I think it more likely that he's patiently plodding. He has no need to rush right now.

Allied logistics need to be secure. By taking more of Kuriles, he will not have to use DS as protector.

Since he has Uruppu (and Sakhalin and Wakkanai and other Kuriles), I see Etorofu as rather extraneous. I was mostly referring to the lack of additional landings on Hokkaido.

From a risk/reward perspective: why risk it? I wouldn't. There's no point if you're not really on the clock. He can just wait for his units to shatter IJA resistance, which will happen sooner or later given the vast disparity in firepower in the units. It's just a matter of how long can obvert (or Japan in any game) hold the line? Will it be long enough?

I don't think he is delaying taking additional bases simply because of kamikazes. He wouldn't have landed on Hokkaido if he wanted to avoid kamikazes - he'll eventually take additional bases there, and Wakkanai is the only one that doesn't trigger kamis.

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

Since he has Uruppu (and Sakhalin and Wakkanai and other Kuriles), I see Etorofu as rather extraneous. I was mostly referring to the lack of additional landings on Hokkaido.

From a risk/reward perspective: why risk it? I wouldn't. There's no point if you're not really on the clock. He can just wait for his units to shatter IJA resistance, which will happen sooner or later given the vast disparity in firepower in the units. It's just a matter of how long can obvert (or Japan in any game) hold the line? Will it be long enough?

I don't think he is delaying taking additional bases simply because of kamikazes. He wouldn't have landed on Hokkaido if he wanted to avoid kamikazes - he'll eventually take additional bases there, and Wakkanai is the only one that doesn't trigger kamis.

This brings up an interesting question. What about Asahikawa? Will it trigger kamis?

On Etorofu, he can't imagine having another base makes it much more secure. If he's plodding it doesn't seem to be because he is aiming to land everything and push toward another base on Hokkaido. Why not land those troops at Wakkanai and go now, since clearly it will be a grind?

I think he wants the troops annihilated, the VPs, and that his air force needs a rest. It's hard to get a good count, but I think pools are low on virtually everything.

Why else would he have stopped the previously incessant sweeps? [;)]

No, it would not trigger kamis because it is not within 20 hexes by sea. No coast, no trigger.

I can think of other reasons to stop sweeps besides pools being low [:)]

The Kamikazie threat is vastly exaggerated anyways. Sure, they're excellent at turning outright useless airframes into moderately effective anti-shipping platforms, but it requires a lot of effort to maximize their full offensive potential.

To be honest that effort is better directed at conventional strikes that actually have a chance of getting home.

There's a level of critical mass that's needed to make kami attacks on Allied CV's work - I've never seen it reached, and I suspected with the current Allied meta of deathstar CV fleets I suspect the number of kami aircraft that Japan would need to get to fly would be five figures at least...

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

The Kamikazie threat is vastly exaggerated anyways. Sure, they're excellent at turning outright useless airframes into moderately effective anti-shipping platforms, but it requires a lot of effort to maximize their full offensive potential.

To be honest that effort is better directed at conventional strikes that actually have a chance of getting home.

There's a level of critical mass that's needed to make kami attacks on Allied CV's work - I've never seen it reached, and I suspected with the current Allied meta of deathstar CV fleets I suspect the number of kami aircraft that Japan would need to get to fly would be five figures at least...

I still maintain that there are other places kamikaze swarms can be effectively utilized, other than into the teeth of a 40 CV hex. Much as IRL, they can be intermingled effectively with conventional airstrikes. It needn't be a 'well, I threw 3,000 kamikazes solo at his CVs and they all got shredded, so the concept is borked'. It's at least worth a consideration.

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

No, it would not trigger kamis because it is not within 20 hexes by sea. No coast, no trigger.

I can think of other reasons to stop sweeps besides pools being low [:)]

I'm considering low pools (fighters or pilots) because they haven't stopped for more than a few days for over six months. So even a 3-4 day lull is notable in this game when those sweeps have been targeting bases simply for the purpose of wearing down CAP (meaning no bombing strikes afterward).

I think due to low pool numbers and the recent addition of new 36 plane fighter groups on the CVs the Allies probably need a bit of time to reorganise.

I keep wanting to post about the Allied loss numbers vs production but I'm trying to get a handle on the range of fluctuation in the loss reports due to FOW.

Hellcats, (F6F-3) for instance, have 2,239 airframes lost in the most recent report (but it's been higher and as low as ~1,800). If that's in the ballpark it seems to be about 400 shy of the entire production run according to my estimates. (These include arrivals on CVs and in LBA groups based on numbers from our game).

F6F-3 Hellcat arrival date: 04-43 > 06-44
Total Build: 2,608
Lost: 2,239

Similarly, but even more dire if the reports are anywhere close to accurate, are the F4U-1A. So far the report is showing losses have outstripped airframes available (and I've had a few this high recently). So even if the numbers are off by 20% the pools (and numbers in groups) could be very low. Considering on July 28 losses were listed as 374, those losses outstrip production (and airframe arrival in groups) by quite a bit.

F4U-1A arrival date: 10-43 > 12/44 (continues producing 78/month, (468 more) and arriving until 06/45)
Total Build: 1173
Lost: 1,544

July 28 losses: 374

For the F4U-1D, arriving in Sept 44, the losses have been high but not as bad. It's been heavily used for sweeps, and seems to have about 425 available total. This is a lot but groups may not be completely fleshed out to max size since the arrivals are 36 plane groups half full on arrival.

F4U-1D
Total Build: 911 (to Jan 15, 1945 @ 158/month. This includes the arrival of the extra fighter groups on USN CVs in January)
Lost: 486

The NZ F4U-1D shows 196 losses. This is nearly the entire production run so far.

F4U-1D
Total Build: 212 (from 5/44 to Jan 15, 1945 @ 25/month)
Lost: 196

When you consider the Marines also need to use these airframes, and groups are getting bigger, there could be some constraints around now.

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

I still maintain that there are other places kamikaze swarms can be effectively utilized, other than into the teeth of a 40 CV hex. Much as IRL, they can be intermingled effectively with conventional airstrikes. It needn't be a 'well, I threw 3,000 kamikazes solo at his CVs and they all got shredded, so the concept is borked'. It's at least worth a consideration.

In the cases you advocate using kamikazes, it is a sad fact that normal Japanese bombers (Judy, Jill, Peggy T, Frances, LillyIIb are almost always much better choices than a kamikaze.

Kamikazes allow Army planes an big anti-ship platform, but in general they are a victory point boon for the Allies. Much like midgets...

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

I still maintain that there are other places kamikaze swarms can be effectively utilized, other than into the teeth of a 40 CV hex. Much as IRL, they can be intermingled effectively with conventional airstrikes. It needn't be a 'well, I threw 3,000 kamikazes solo at his CVs and they all got shredded, so the concept is borked'. It's at least worth a consideration.

In the cases you advocate using kamikazes, it is a sad fact that normal Japanese bombers (Judy, Jill, Peggy T, Frances, LillyIIb are almost always much better choices than a kamikaze.

Kamikazes allow Army planes an big anti-ship platform, but in general they are a victory point boon for the Allies. Much like midgets...

And yet I still use midgets... because they're only a 4VP chit tossed into the fire, vs. a 40+ plane unit.

Kamikazes may be useful, but their wholesale use is not advisable IMO.

[quote

And yet I still use midgets..
[/quote]

And I do too, and I use kamikazes.

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Kamikazes allow Army planes an big anti-ship platform, but in general they are a victory point boon for the Allies. Much like midgets...

Your opinion based upon your gameplay uses. Your experiences are not hard coded, so it is quite possible for a resourceful Japanese player to improve upon them. I would opt for trying them judiciously.

As for midgets, I've had smashing success with them several times. Quite worth their judicious use in my opinion. Your (lack of) success may vary, of course.

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Kamikazes allow Army planes an big anti-ship platform, but in general they are a victory point boon for the Allies. Much like midgets...

Your opinion based upon your gameplay uses. Your experiences are not hard coded, so it is quite possible for a resourceful Japanese player to improve upon them. I would opt for trying them judiciously.

As for midgets, I've had smashing success with them several times. Quite worth their judicious use in my opinion. Your (lack of) success may vary, of course.

Alright, I am obviously not clearly communicating because we basically agree.

I would take these enemy plane losses with a grain of salt. From my meagre experience so far in testing, months on end gametime against myself mostly, they are seldom accurate, even when taking averaging over multiple results into consideration.

The F41A production checks out with your numberm but there are also 9 squadrons arriving with the plane, a total of 135 extra aircraft, which makes a total of around 1300, early january 1945. This particular pool could very well be near the bottom.

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Kamikazes allow Army planes an big anti-ship platform, but in general they are a victory point boon for the Allies. Much like midgets...

As for midgets, I've had smashing success with them several times. Quite worth their judicious use in my opinion. Your (lack of) success may vary, of course.

agree is not good forming Kamikazes; plus de best are Reppus; and lot better defending japan Cv than using for a 100 kg and the pilot; never good kamikazes

ORIGINAL: ericv

I would take these enemy plane losses with a grain of salt. From my meagre experience so far in testing, months on end gametime against myself mostly, they are seldom accurate, even when taking averaging over multiple results into consideration.

The F41A production checks out with your numberm but there are also 9 squadrons arriving with the plane, a total of 135 extra aircraft, which makes a total of around 1300, early january 1945. This particular pool could very well be near the bottom.

I'm certain they're not accurate. They do tell some story though, and I can confirm heavy losses through day by day loss reports and the animations I watch. The Allies are losing a lot of planes, and it's taking a toll.

By looking at these reports I am trying to see how the pattern is developing, and I can see the range of FOW. I'm sure it's somewhat random, but within parameters. It's never been farther than 400-500 losses in either direction (the Hellcats I'm referring to, as they're the highest losses reported) so I'm betting they're somewhere in the middle.

Some 'music' to soothe your soul on a rough morning, Obvert: [:D]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lu4EE05owDI