The First Team: Take Two!

[John 3rd]

Nice work down here:

[John 3rd]

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

How many goats and kids did you sacrifice?

[:D][8D][:D]

My eldest was a little nervous but I THINK he is still around...John? John?? John??? Uh-Oh...

Do NOT call Social Services! I have enough trouble as is...

[2ndACR]

I take it you decided to go the overland route or did you go for direct invasion?

[John 3rd]

Overland!  Brad figured that would work out.  We took 2 Brigades and a TK Reg.

On the same day we attacked Singapore with 4 Inf Div, 1 Brig, 3 Eng Reg, 3 TK Reg, and a crapload of other units against Forts 3.  Waht happens you ask???

o----1   God Blessed **&*&^%&$))+  Forts stay at 3.

I have suggested to Brad we import the entire China Army to see if we can defeat FORTRESS Singapore.  What CRAPOLA...

[2ndACR]

Well, there is a small trick you can do.......bombard with divs and shock attack with just the engineers. IIRC, that will knock forts down every time. The engineers can get a bit busted up though. (note: this is considered gamey by alot)
 
Are you shock attacking or deliberate? Shock attack will almost always knock down a fort level if you have 2X the AV.
 
Bombard, bombard and then when everyones fatigue and disruption hit 20-30, hit her again with a big shock attack.

[John 3rd]

We have been Del Attacking and for this last one I ordered a Shock Attack.  We have nearly 3-1 in AV over them.  Result---0-1 Forts remain.

[2ndACR]

Supply good? Got an HQ in the hex? Run a battleship bombardment into Singapore.......disrupt the heck out of them......time it so you shock attack the turn the bombardment hits.

[John 3rd]

We'll try a BB Bombardment.  We'll also up the number of bombers hitting troops from 150 to 250.  That should help too...
 

[2ndACR]

Only BB's......NO CA's!!!!!!!!! The CA's will get pounded........remember to escort not bombard.

[modrow]

Nemo,

as always, thanks for your interesting thoughts (and the interesting pointer to Lanchesters Law, have to read up on it). You provide very good "brainfood". The numbers/odds lesson is something I think I do start to absorb.

I also recognize more and more what you mean when you talk about the importance of phasing, but am still far from getting a firm grasp on the topic. I'll need more lessons/examples [;)]

I am particularly interested in two of the issues you mentioned:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121
...

2. Derby, Broome etc... These aren't killing blows and they aren't setting up truly strategically significant killing blows. As such I wouldn't bother with them. When you have the potential superiority enjoyed by the Japanese in this game you should disdain swordplay and, instead, like any good Samurai look for a single, clean killing stroke.

I was under the impression that this is to a large extent a maskirovka-operation, drawing attention away from the area the real strike is aiming at. Of course, an important question is whether the timing of this operation is right. Actually, I am not sure about that - at least if this was on a tactical level, I would think it is too early, a few days would do. For an attempt to influence the strategic allocation/use of assets by the Allies, I am not sure whether timing is that bad.

Perhaps someone could provide some thoughts re. timing of deceptive ops...

Furthermore, I am actually completely undecided whether one should consider a quick reinforcement of Australia in this situation something that I would like to see on the Allies agenda. The fast way to reinforce in the situation the Allies were in would have been moving assets from India. This is probably good if it was lcu's, but would the RN moving to Australia have been something good or bad ? No interference with the invasion vs. no chance to destroy it now. Any thoughts anyone (I am aware that the raid on Colombo may have made this issue less relevant for this game) ?

Overall I think the Japanese in this game are playing a very good game but I think that they really need to re-adjust the balance of parallel to series operations and need to look at Lashio. If I was playing as Allies here not taking Lashio would see Burma in my hands within 2 months and a concerted thrust to reinforce India and also push through the trails into Thailand etc within 3 months. That would prevent India falling and give the Allies victory 12 to 18 months earlier than would otherwise be possible. Lashio MUST be contested.

Someone mentioned below already what came to my mind as well: How does one keep those forces supplied ? Anyone out there with experience whether this works and what supply sources / supply numbers need to be available to pursue this option ?

As always, thanks to everyone sharing his experience and to the hosts of this AAR for providing a basis for interesting discussion !

Hartwig

[Canoerebel]

John and Q-Ball have done an excellent job "imperiling" Australia in order to affect their opponent's strategic thinking.  John followed a very similar course of action with me, and it froze me pretty good.  Getting reinforcements to Australia from West Coast this early in the game is tough - it's a long way; plus the presence of the KB in the Societies let's them know any effort could be contested.  Moreover, they have to be worried about India, too, so they probably don't feel free to ship reinforcements from that direction.
 
They're in great shape if, as 2ndACR posits, the failure to take Lashio isn't critical.  I think it is.  We'll see who's right.  Their invasion of India will be fun to watch.  John flooded Australia and nearly took it from me.  I think he and Q-Ball will either succeed, or come close, to taking India.

[Nemo121]

I'm with canoerebel... The failure to take ( or contest ) Lashio is critical. 8 x Chinese Armies with an average strength of 400 = 3,200 AV x 50 Exp x 50 for leader exp and inspiration etc = max assault AV of 1600. Using the forest to give you a defensive bonus this means that putting 600 AV ( 2 divisions ) into Lashio will prevent the Chinese from moving past it.


Hartwig,

Maskirovka... The timing all depends on what you want to do. I developed my threat along the Noumea/New Zealand axis slowly for 4 months in order to draw the Allied navy and ground troops where I wanted them. I then struck decisively on only THREE occasions and in so doing destroyed 2 US Divisions and 4-5 Oz/Nz Brigades, 1 USN CV and 5 BBs + 300 or so planes. The total cost to my forces for this destruction was the loss of some 100 army bombers bombing Noumea and slightly over a dozen of my CV-based fighters and about 30 strike planes.


At other times maskirovka can simply be a one day dash into range. It all depends on what you are trying to achieve.


As re: Oz.... Those bases are so meaningless that as the Allies I wouldn't even bother contesting them. If the Allies reinforce Oz in response to these invasions then the Allies are guilty of a strategic error of the first order. You just don't respond to ever enemy action. You sit, you bide your time and you wait for decisive opportunities. Then, when you strike you create a lot of havoc. Running around from place to place in response to an enemy who has interior lines is a quick path to defeat.


As re: india.... I landed 15 divisions + 500 AV of tanks + 500 aviation support in Ceylon and India. That required about 50,000 tons of supplies just to operate at normal combat levels. I brought 100,000 tons of supplies and that was sufficient for me to take India. Obviously though things were tight and one reason I was able to get away with so few supplies was that I had planned my assault to split the enemy ( reducing their ability to resist and thus minimising my need for supplies ) and also to take a few key supply-producing areas quickly.

I'd also point out that you'll be able to maximise your efficiency of supply utilisation per unit time AND over the course of the war if you max out your combat power and supply delivery to the chief axis of advance. Again, the Lanchester Laws speak to this.


last thing about the Allies reinforcing Oz given the phasing of ops here. Clausewitz said it best, "Order, counter-order, disorder." This is incredibly germain here and is yet another reason why, as Allies, I wouldn't move toward Oz.

The Allies should sit tight knowing that any operations against Oz currently under way aren't critical and thus are highly likely to represent a maskirovka which is being done on the cheap. They are gathering around India and they should have faith in their strategic vision. Sometimes the worst thing to do is second-guess yourself. In my games vs 2ndACR and Damian my fleet spends 80%+ of its time in port and only a minority of my aerial units are ever in action. It's all about efficiency and one of the efficiencies you should attempt to enact is efficiency of thought and decision. Think well once and then don't second-guess yourself, it only wears out your planes and ships.

[Canoerebel]

Yikes, I feel like I'm back in physics class, my learned professor is giving golden instruction, and I'm such a ignorant peon that I'll never be able to reach the exalted level at which the master sits!

[Nemo121]

Canoerebel,

Umm, well that wasn't my intention at all. I felt I was asked to clarify and so I did so.... I was trying to be helpful but it seems I've caused offence.

Time to crawl back under my rock methinks...


If anyone wants to continue to discuss these things please feel free to post in my AAR and I'll respond there. I don't want people thinking I'm trying to hijack other threads.

[John 3rd]

Nemo,

Don't retreat under the rock.  Your advice is always welcome and highly valued.  I am sure Dan wasn't offended.

Your perspective in how you play this game is so different from most players I LOVE reading it and thinking on it.  Makes for great learning and discussion just like in the Forlorn Hopes AAR!  Dan--You asked about the defeat I inflicted on your Fleet when moving into Hokkaido this is the man who provided the idea of the massed Fighter Ambush.

John

[Canoerebel]

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Canoerebel,

Umm, well that wasn't my intention at all. I felt I was asked to clarify and so I did so.... I was trying to be helpful but it seems I've caused offence.

Time to crawl back under my rock methinks...


If anyone wants to continue to discuss these things please feel free to post in my AAR and I'll respond there. I don't want people thinking I'm trying to hijack other threads.

Oops, Nemo, it seems that my attempt at "eloquence" only misled you. What I meant to convey was: You really know you're stuff, and I can learn a great deal from you.

[John 3rd]

HAH!  I know my fiendish opponent well enough to read his words for what he meant.  Let us keep the brainstorming rolling.  OUtside opinions are always welcome and any conversation that leads to--dare I say--knowledge is a VERY good thing!
 

[Nemo121]

Oops, sorry Canoerebel... I guess that points up a difference in phraseology. In Ireland if you called someone a peon ( and they understood what you meant ) you'd be in a physical fight in seconds... Post-colonial baggage. Obviously it mustn't have the same connotations in the US.   So, when I saw you referring to yourself as a peon I thought you felt insulted --- which I wouldn't want.
 
Out of interest.... Does peon carry any significant negative connotations in the US?  Or is it just another word without a colonial subtext?

[ny59giants]

Nemo,
As another mental health professional, we both know that words carry only part of the message. It's hard to get vocal tone and body language from someone's words on this message board.

I have used the word "peon," but it is usually done in a sarcastic manner with those I know well enough to know it will not be taken seriously.

Remember, I speak American, not English. Now my dialect is more "Southernese" as I have been down south since '92. [:D]

[Canoerebel]

"Peon" is a neutral word in the Southeastern United States where I live.  The context and tone may make it humorous (as I intended), or it could be used negatively to connote "a person of lesser stature."  But it isn't "fightin' words" down here by any means.