Re: Logistics in the Pacific - USSAmerica (A), Mike (J)
Posted: Fri Apr 01, 2022 9:55 pm
You should think bigger. You have an excellent start here, you have an opportunity to go for an Indian or Australian invasion.
What's your Strategy?
https://forums.matrixgames.com:443/
I totally agree with everything you say here, Lowpe. I'd love to take Ledo. What I'll probably try is to take one of the bases to along the rail line to the west and then march there. Unless, of course, Ledo is undefended. I doubt that will be the case though. I've never had a problem taking Lashio in the past. We'll see. Magwe, absolutely. Whatever oil I get from there I consider a gift.Lowpe wrote: Mon Apr 04, 2022 1:01 pm
How about take Magwe, Lashio and China? Lashio can be absolutely horrible to take.... Maybe Ledo if it is undefended? Ceylon is maybe doable especially as a lure to get the American Fleet Carriers into an ambush in the Pacific. Taking Ceylon won't slow down the Allied push into Burma by much and you need to capture the fuel there (which a good AFB won't let you).
Even if Japan were to destroy the American fleet carriers I would recommend no uber adventures unless playing for auto-victory. Generally speaking, I favor an aggressive defensive war with a less than historical expansion everywhere but China/possibly Ceylon with a constant appreciation of oil/fuel/supplies.
Very interesting. I really don't expect Mike to risk his carriers early. That little excursion he sent to the Aleutians only happened because he knew where all of my carriers were. Now, he doesn't know where any of my carriers are. That concerns him. At least that's what he told me.Lowpe wrote: Mon Apr 04, 2022 2:51 pm I took Ceylon once in a scenario 1 game that did go on to Japan Autovictory in late January 1943. My original intention was to simply destroy the great AA units that spawn there...I abandoned it shortly thereafter but managed an emergency reinforcement and naval battle there in Dec of 42 helping me to achieve autovictory.
If AV didn't loom, I was perfectly prepared to give it back with very minimal losses in ground troops at anytime. I didn't start the game going for AV, it just evolved that way from a great counterattack against America's own counter attack far too early in the Gilberts. From their the pieces just fell into place.
Mike Solli wrote: Wed Feb 23, 2022 9:20 pm 27 Dec 41
Assaulting units:
21st PA Infantry Division – AV reduced from 38 to 25
26th PS Cavalry Regiment – AV reduced from 38 to 0
192nd Tank Battalion – AV reduced from 38 to 9
194th Tank Battalion – AV reduced from 46 to 30
Cavite USN Base Force – AV 0
86th PS Coastal Artillery Battalion – AV 0
Subic Bay Defenses – AV 0
We all have our risk appetites and play styles of course. No harm in going for less risky (and more realistic) strategic objectives. Let's be clear though - invading chunks of India or Australia in a Scenario 1 game is very much possible and has often been successfully done. I am sure we all of know of dozens of games where it happened and I have done it myself. The key in successfully doing so to be able to read how the campaign is going and to be prepared to quickly withdraw once things start becoming to dangerous.Mike Solli wrote: Mon Apr 04, 2022 2:42 pm I totally agree with you, Lowpe. I'm not one for too much expansion. I rarely go beyond the historical, other than northern Australia. And that's just temporary. The goal there is 4-6 months. My goal for Ceylon is to destroy units and make Mike look over his shoulder. If he pulls anything out of Burma in order to reinforce India, I consider that a victory. I really want him to pull fighters back to India so I can bash what is left in Burma. That can put him at a disadvantage for a long time. I love killing fighters.
Aren't all JFBs nuts?![]()
Hi Xargun! I take a screen shot of the bombardment/deliberate assault/shock at the beginning and track reduction throughout. So, It's not perfect but it is a nice generalization of reduction of combat power. It's not very easy to do when there are a lot of units involved, but in this case it's pretty easy. The numbers almost always increase by the next turn due to repair of disabled squads. I look at the trend. If it's going down (which it is at Clark Field), then life is good.Xargun wrote: Wed Apr 06, 2022 10:48 pmMike Solli wrote: Wed Feb 23, 2022 9:20 pm 27 Dec 41
Assaulting units:
21st PA Infantry Division – AV reduced from 38 to 25
26th PS Cavalry Regiment – AV reduced from 38 to 0
192nd Tank Battalion – AV reduced from 38 to 9
194th Tank Battalion – AV reduced from 46 to 30
Cavite USN Base Force – AV 0
86th PS Coastal Artillery Battalion – AV 0
Subic Bay Defenses – AV 0
How are you seeing the enemy AV ?
Xargun
I would like to try Kiso PBs leading ASW TFs with the SCs.ITAKLinus wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 10:48 am I strongly dislike those PBs, but that's the only thing available and so we have to do with what we have.
Generally, I leave 11knts PBs to long-range escort. 12knts PBs to short-range escort. 14knts PBs for either long range escort of 14-knts convoys or fast transport (1,000 capacity is actually quite good). Beware that these PBs are very fuel intensive after all and so over time the cost of having them sailing around is quite high.
10 knts SCs are for the Gozan class, which, in my games, operate in Hokkaido and Fusan area mostly. Faster SC classes provide proper ASW patrols. I don't care too much of water depth since I mostly try to make enemy sub waste torpedoes, rather than trying to sink them directly.
F.ex. there are various hexes between Onshu and Bonins and between Bonins and Marianas which must have ASW patrols all the time and I like to employ SCs for the duty. Their small range is not a problem, given the abundance of fuel at nearby bases.
The problem with them (as with most Japanese escorts early in the war) is that they carry the Type 95 DC. Allied subs can dive deeper than the DCs can go. Not sure how much good they do. That's after the sub attack. They do, on occasion, spot the sub before the attack can occur though. *shrug*LongLance93 wrote: Sun Apr 17, 2022 10:24 amI would like to try Kiso PBs leading ASW TFs with the SCs.ITAKLinus wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 10:48 am I strongly dislike those PBs, but that's the only thing available and so we have to do with what we have.
Generally, I leave 11knts PBs to long-range escort. 12knts PBs to short-range escort. 14knts PBs for either long range escort of 14-knts convoys or fast transport (1,000 capacity is actually quite good). Beware that these PBs are very fuel intensive after all and so over time the cost of having them sailing around is quite high.
10 knts SCs are for the Gozan class, which, in my games, operate in Hokkaido and Fusan area mostly. Faster SC classes provide proper ASW patrols. I don't care too much of water depth since I mostly try to make enemy sub waste torpedoes, rather than trying to sink them directly.
F.ex. there are various hexes between Onshu and Bonins and between Bonins and Marianas which must have ASW patrols all the time and I like to employ SCs for the duty. Their small range is not a problem, given the abundance of fuel at nearby bases.
![]()
Usually is....GPmadflava13 wrote: Wed May 25, 2022 5:45 pm Hoping it's just normal real life stuff slowing this AAR down!