ORIGINAL: Crackaces
I'm devastated Alfred .. I am going to need therapy [:D]
Thanks for the feedback. I got the notion that the higher level bases were needed because of my experiences in Burma. My guys just did not do what I needed with enough force until I had level 7 bases. That is 3 - 4 bomber and 3 -4 fighter groups. But I suspect where you are leading me is that the IJ could build say 5 level 2 bases disburse the fighter assets, and 1 -2 level 4 bases and project enough airpower in the area to squash this foray....
I think I understand that ..I have no clue how he could draw so much supply that I cannot last until 1943. One thing that is different here is the IJNAF and IJAAF bomber losses thus far. I am not sure how many LYBFB lose over 600 bombers before the end of 1942 scenaraio #1. But I suspect what Alfred is telling me that given a commitment of BB's and Airpower that the losses I am now seeing would be miniscule compared to what is possible ..
However, I still think in terms of getting crushed . I have more advantages in terms of submarine warfare. I have not hit anything in the Solomon's and ahve taken the worse of it in the shallow waters .. in the deep waters in 2 weeks we have sunk 4 xAK's without any reprisal ... I am attriting what he is sending out here which was a part of my plan ...what Alfred is telling me is it is not going to be enough ...[:(]
OK .. I have to think about pushing the big bowl of jelly somewhere else [:'(]
Exactly my point.[:)]
In an ideal world, yes having level 7 airfields is a noticeable advantage which can not be fully replicated by an equivalent number of smaller airfields. But, and this is important, Japan starts off with a huge qualitative advantage both in pilots and airframes. Even with the time wasted by your opponent, which dithering has almost certainly allowed the gap to be narrowed considerably whereas with good enemy play, the gap could have been extended, the enemy should still retain a qualitative edge.
As to the supply stockpile, enemy air bombardment alone can cause it to be burned off at a very rapid rate. Two main avenues for burning supply;
(1) the cost of airframe and device replacements. The Logistics 101 thread explains the high cost in supply consumption. I won't go into details here as Crackaces is aware of that thread,
(2) directs hits on airbase and port supply depots. The old supply destruction rate no longer applies, instead the amount of supply destroyed is now dependent on the size of ordnance dropped. However I have previously argued that for ease of determining destruction, the old rate can still be used as a rough approximation. So whilst it would clearly be overstating that a single airfield supply hit has destroyed 1% of the supply stockpile, 2-3 supply hits will in all likelihood be pretty close to destroying 1% of the supply stockpile.
This of course overlooks the consumption of supply by Allied offensive operations, both air and sea, by Allied forces based on Tarawa.
Of course the obvious solution is to send in more supply.[:)] But that is where we get into the issue of the Gilberts becoming a valid strategic operation for Japan whereas normally at this stage of the war, they provide little real strategic benefit to Japan.
I'm not saying it won't be good enough, I've already indicated my assessment of your opponent. My point, and I was only presenting the Gilberts theatre as the exemplar, was that you need to be more rigorous in your assumptions otherwise their shortcomings would be exposed against a better quality opponent.
Practice perfect leads to perfect execution.[:)]
Alfred
