Japanese Strategy guide
PBEM barrage
Hi, I'll post more as soon as the PBEM traffic slows down.
Due to the Shortland/Lunga debate I have to wait untill the new PBEM games get to a later date to post analaysis.
Due to the Shortland/Lunga debate I have to wait untill the new PBEM games get to a later date to post analaysis.
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
-
DeadpanDevilDog
- Posts: 12
- Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2002 12:13 am
- Location: Fort Belvoir, VA
re: Mogami
You forgot one type of player Mogami, it is possible you consider him the 'Grognard'
The Simplifier: This person tries to make everything simple.
Thus the work load is reduced. The Bettys will always be piled up
on Rabul as will almost all the air assets. Only search assets
will be anywhere else.
The Simplifier is not like a grognard but he is just as dangerous.
The Simplifier is the type of player that will simply waltz up to
Lunga and dump EVERY unit of the 18th army on it(an example)
Why? Because its simple.
The Simplifier will pick an objective, and he will NOT deviate
until defeated or it is secured. He will use ALL assets to pursue
that end. He will happily ignore other events, in the pursuit
of the objective.
The Simplifier: This person tries to make everything simple.
Thus the work load is reduced. The Bettys will always be piled up
on Rabul as will almost all the air assets. Only search assets
will be anywhere else.
The Simplifier is not like a grognard but he is just as dangerous.
The Simplifier is the type of player that will simply waltz up to
Lunga and dump EVERY unit of the 18th army on it(an example)
Why? Because its simple.
The Simplifier will pick an objective, and he will NOT deviate
until defeated or it is secured. He will use ALL assets to pursue
that end. He will happily ignore other events, in the pursuit
of the objective.
“It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.”
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
re: Troop Rotation
I must disagree with you Mogami. What you describe is desirable
of course but.....
First, it requires ALOT of ship movement. Moving ships can be attacked.
Moving alot of ships requires alot of fuel.
As units attrit, is is easily possible to send the replacement
unit forward, rather than the parent unit back.
The fact are that the enemy will be presented with more opportunity if you devote alot off assets to movement. This cannot be avoided. I am certain you are aware of this.
I would argue that maintaining the initiative is more important
than any singular unit. EVEN a baseforce.
of course but.....
First, it requires ALOT of ship movement. Moving ships can be attacked.
Moving alot of ships requires alot of fuel.
As units attrit, is is easily possible to send the replacement
unit forward, rather than the parent unit back.
The fact are that the enemy will be presented with more opportunity if you devote alot off assets to movement. This cannot be avoided. I am certain you are aware of this.
I would argue that maintaining the initiative is more important
than any singular unit. EVEN a baseforce.
“It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.”
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
LOL
OK Chiteng you can leave your troops where ever they are. I have already rotated mine in PBEM game. The AP's fuel at Truk and have enough for the round trip. Reinforcment groups do not reduce disruption or fatigue nor do they repair the broken parts.
(The addition of new sqds and guns etc is nice but I usally leave the replacments at Truk and marry them up when the larger formation comes back) I build a chain of bases for ASW/Air cover to reduce the chance of enemy attack. As will be seen when I up date Mog-IJN/U2-USN the Japanese do need to stay out of range of Allied LBA (B-17's) (They can use fast transport and barges to protect the AP's. Rushing forward with depleted units is worse then the delay.
(The addition of new sqds and guns etc is nice but I usally leave the replacments at Truk and marry them up when the larger formation comes back) I build a chain of bases for ASW/Air cover to reduce the chance of enemy attack. As will be seen when I up date Mog-IJN/U2-USN the Japanese do need to stay out of range of Allied LBA (B-17's) (They can use fast transport and barges to protect the AP's. Rushing forward with depleted units is worse then the delay.
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
re: Mogami
It must be quite a trick to avoid attack from Hudsons and
B-25s. They are the ones that tend to get thru.
Also I think you premise alot on defeating the USN starting forces.
I dont engage the Jap carriers at the start. Yes that means
that the Jap will have an edge in certain actions. It also
means that I WONT lose my CV while they are vulnerable.
It is better to have a fleet that he has to keep track of, than losing it and he has a free hand.
SS boats (in my opinion) are too shortranged to patrol
between Truk and Rabual.
B-25s. They are the ones that tend to get thru.
Also I think you premise alot on defeating the USN starting forces.
I dont engage the Jap carriers at the start. Yes that means
that the Jap will have an edge in certain actions. It also
means that I WONT lose my CV while they are vulnerable.
It is better to have a fleet that he has to keep track of, than losing it and he has a free hand.
SS boats (in my opinion) are too shortranged to patrol
between Truk and Rabual.
“It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.”
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
Already done it
Hi, I might not have been clear. Rotation is not a theory I do it in PBEM games. Not all my opponents offer battle with their CV. (I think Dan must have at least 6 sitting in Noumea)
It's a wargame. There are risks. The question (which we appear to answer in differant manner) is whether it is riskier to leave formations where they might become engaged in combat in depleted state or to remove tired units and replace with fresh ones.
Whether before embarking on offensive operations you are going to pick up a depleted unit or a fresh one.
I have a level of readiness I look for in a deployed formation.
All deployed formations have fresh units assigned to relieved them. I maintain above this a reserve to meet unexpected needs.
It does mean where another player would place 2 divisons and pretty much leave them be untill he needed them for another location I place only place one. I do not relie on my ground units (or air units for that matter) to defend my bases. I count on the fleet (supported by the airgroups) My ground combat units are to defend my airfields and ports from all but full blown offensives. I use recon to be aware of the enemys intents. My ground units are for capturing enemy bases not guarding mine. If the fleet is defeated then the land battle will not matter. The enemy can bring as much as is needed. (So it is best not to over commit.)
Airgroups while dangerous are not reliable. Weather and night can prevent their intervention. (and on forward bases make them a target) The best defense for any base is the fleet and the airfields on bases in supporting range.
I see no reason to allow land combat units to suffer from being deployed at locations for no reason.
I maintain a constant lookout for enemy submarine carrier surface combat units. There will be times they inflict damage dispite all I do. So be it. I will inflict damage in return.
Risk is a part of the game. When where and how much risk to take is the part of the game the player decides. Learning to avoid actions that result in excessive loss is a part of the game.
It's a wargame. There are risks. The question (which we appear to answer in differant manner) is whether it is riskier to leave formations where they might become engaged in combat in depleted state or to remove tired units and replace with fresh ones.
Whether before embarking on offensive operations you are going to pick up a depleted unit or a fresh one.
I have a level of readiness I look for in a deployed formation.
All deployed formations have fresh units assigned to relieved them. I maintain above this a reserve to meet unexpected needs.
It does mean where another player would place 2 divisons and pretty much leave them be untill he needed them for another location I place only place one. I do not relie on my ground units (or air units for that matter) to defend my bases. I count on the fleet (supported by the airgroups) My ground combat units are to defend my airfields and ports from all but full blown offensives. I use recon to be aware of the enemys intents. My ground units are for capturing enemy bases not guarding mine. If the fleet is defeated then the land battle will not matter. The enemy can bring as much as is needed. (So it is best not to over commit.)
Airgroups while dangerous are not reliable. Weather and night can prevent their intervention. (and on forward bases make them a target) The best defense for any base is the fleet and the airfields on bases in supporting range.
I see no reason to allow land combat units to suffer from being deployed at locations for no reason.
I maintain a constant lookout for enemy submarine carrier surface combat units. There will be times they inflict damage dispite all I do. So be it. I will inflict damage in return.
Risk is a part of the game. When where and how much risk to take is the part of the game the player decides. Learning to avoid actions that result in excessive loss is a part of the game.
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
re: Ok
Hi, I might not have been clear. Rotation is not a theory I do it in PBEM games. Not all my opponents offer battle with their CV. (I think Dan must have at least 6 sitting in Noumea)
****************************************************
Six is enough to stop almost anything. especially if you strip
the bombers and load Land based fighters on them.
****************************************************
It's a wargame. There are risks. The question (which we appear to answer in differant manner) is whether it is riskier to leave formations where they might become engaged in combat in depleted state or to remove tired units and replace with fresh ones.
Whether before embarking on offensive operations you are going to pick up a depleted unit or a fresh one.
****************************************************
Well it is possible that we differ soley on what you are terming
depleted. Depleated to me, means that the name has been
changed and the parent formation suddenly appears at Truk.
****************************************************
I have a level of readiness I look for in a deployed formation.
All deployed formations have fresh units assigned to relieved them. I maintain above this a reserve to meet unexpected needs.
It does mean where another player would place 2 divisons and pretty much leave them be untill he needed them for another location I place only place one. I do not relie on my ground units (or air units for that matter) to defend my bases. I count on the fleet (supported by the airgroups) My ground combat units are to defend my airfields and ports from all but full blown offensives. I use recon to be aware of the enemys intents. My ground units are for capturing enemy bases not guarding mine. If the fleet is defeated then the land battle will not matter. The enemy can bring as much as is needed. (So it is best not to over commit.)
****************************************************
That is great in theory but there is one crucial area that WILL
require a sustained ground presence. In the event you are
trying to expand a base. Either air or naval. Something will have
to protect the ENG. You cannot avoid that.
****************************************************
Airgroups while dangerous are not reliable. Weather and night can prevent their intervention. (and on forward bases make them a target) The best defense for any base is the fleet and the airfields on bases in supporting range.
****************************************************
A fleet w/o fuel and supply is just a target.
****************************************************
I see no reason to allow land combat units to suffer from being deployed at locations for no reason.
I maintain a constant lookout for enemy submarine carrier surface combat units. There will be times they inflict damage dispite all I do. So be it. I will inflict damage in return.
Risk is a part of the game. When where and how much risk to take is the part of the game the player decides. Learning to avoid actions that result in excessive loss is a part of the game.
****************************************************
Unless you deploy them for a non-obvious purpose.
An example would be. Put alot of anti-aircraft WITH supply
at Gili Gili, therebye insuring that the incomming Jap planes suffer
exaggerated losses.
Another example would be to pretend to be developing a base
when you have no such intent. You just want to get his attention.
The problem with using the fleet is, there is NO USN for the first
critical months. You have no battleline. HE DOES. The Japs can afford to trade one for one just to remove your assets.
Sure its stupid in the LONG run, but in the short run it works.
So when you run out of fleet assets, you just conceeded the
battlefield. Whatever it happens to be.
As the Jap player, if you make no provision for when you lose
control of the air, your defense will simply collapse when you do.
What good is that?
Plus a carefully nutured ground formation protected from all harm
and lovingly deployed, will degrade quickly, even unopposed.
You didnt say anything about the Simplifier.
****************************************************
Six is enough to stop almost anything. especially if you strip
the bombers and load Land based fighters on them.
****************************************************
It's a wargame. There are risks. The question (which we appear to answer in differant manner) is whether it is riskier to leave formations where they might become engaged in combat in depleted state or to remove tired units and replace with fresh ones.
Whether before embarking on offensive operations you are going to pick up a depleted unit or a fresh one.
****************************************************
Well it is possible that we differ soley on what you are terming
depleted. Depleated to me, means that the name has been
changed and the parent formation suddenly appears at Truk.
****************************************************
I have a level of readiness I look for in a deployed formation.
All deployed formations have fresh units assigned to relieved them. I maintain above this a reserve to meet unexpected needs.
It does mean where another player would place 2 divisons and pretty much leave them be untill he needed them for another location I place only place one. I do not relie on my ground units (or air units for that matter) to defend my bases. I count on the fleet (supported by the airgroups) My ground combat units are to defend my airfields and ports from all but full blown offensives. I use recon to be aware of the enemys intents. My ground units are for capturing enemy bases not guarding mine. If the fleet is defeated then the land battle will not matter. The enemy can bring as much as is needed. (So it is best not to over commit.)
****************************************************
That is great in theory but there is one crucial area that WILL
require a sustained ground presence. In the event you are
trying to expand a base. Either air or naval. Something will have
to protect the ENG. You cannot avoid that.
****************************************************
Airgroups while dangerous are not reliable. Weather and night can prevent their intervention. (and on forward bases make them a target) The best defense for any base is the fleet and the airfields on bases in supporting range.
****************************************************
A fleet w/o fuel and supply is just a target.
****************************************************
I see no reason to allow land combat units to suffer from being deployed at locations for no reason.
I maintain a constant lookout for enemy submarine carrier surface combat units. There will be times they inflict damage dispite all I do. So be it. I will inflict damage in return.
Risk is a part of the game. When where and how much risk to take is the part of the game the player decides. Learning to avoid actions that result in excessive loss is a part of the game.
****************************************************
Unless you deploy them for a non-obvious purpose.
An example would be. Put alot of anti-aircraft WITH supply
at Gili Gili, therebye insuring that the incomming Jap planes suffer
exaggerated losses.
Another example would be to pretend to be developing a base
when you have no such intent. You just want to get his attention.
The problem with using the fleet is, there is NO USN for the first
critical months. You have no battleline. HE DOES. The Japs can afford to trade one for one just to remove your assets.
Sure its stupid in the LONG run, but in the short run it works.
So when you run out of fleet assets, you just conceeded the
battlefield. Whatever it happens to be.
As the Jap player, if you make no provision for when you lose
control of the air, your defense will simply collapse when you do.
What good is that?
Plus a carefully nutured ground formation protected from all harm
and lovingly deployed, will degrade quickly, even unopposed.
You didnt say anything about the Simplifier.
“It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.”
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
re: Port Moresby
I am a latecomer to this forum so bear with me:
It isnt that I agree with Mogami in all things, but he is correct
about ONE thing. Unless you take Port Moresby, sooner or later
Rabual WILL be neutralized by air attack, from Port Moresby.
My attack force is normally all units of the 8th area army.
Only because they are what you have at the start.
I do NOT normally sail around Gili Gili to land directly or next to
PM. Normally I land everything at Buna. I also do NOT build up
Dolwhatever. It takes too long.
The point is that you want to neutralize PM. It is unlikely that
you will have the time or the enourmous supply needed to
build up BOTH PM and Dolwhatever.
I would estminate after walking across the Kokoda trail the 8th army arrives with about 25% effectiveness. Its enough.
If you wait for the intact divisions, you will allow the USN to have all its CVs ready. That means that it is a HUGE gamble.
There is no need, to gamble. Simply dont wait.
But you absolutely MUST place PM under close blockade.
That means take Gili Gili and use it to base re-fueling efforts at.
You can run bombardment out of Rabual, but I have found that
it consumes alot of fuel, and damages fleet assets.
Now you simply bomb and bombard the place until the anti-aircraft
no longer fires back. It is at that point you know you are ready.
Of course shoot down any C-47 or Bombers or both that are
desperately flying supply in.
If that anti-aircraft isnt firing back, that also means he can no longer attack. It is then that it is safe to move into the hex.
It doesnt matter how bad you are chopped up, if he cant attack you. After moving into the hex, shell him a couple times to get
a feel for the resistance, and then attack.
Usually it takes roughly a week of sustained attacks to take the place. If he reinforced it from Australia, he simply increases
the bag of prisoners. If you are REAL lucky, he will be unable to
transfer the air groups out. Nailing them is a HUGE plus.
Now the question I have for Mogami:
If you lose PM as the Allies, is it worth taking it back?
It isnt that I agree with Mogami in all things, but he is correct
about ONE thing. Unless you take Port Moresby, sooner or later
Rabual WILL be neutralized by air attack, from Port Moresby.
My attack force is normally all units of the 8th area army.
Only because they are what you have at the start.
I do NOT normally sail around Gili Gili to land directly or next to
PM. Normally I land everything at Buna. I also do NOT build up
Dolwhatever. It takes too long.
The point is that you want to neutralize PM. It is unlikely that
you will have the time or the enourmous supply needed to
build up BOTH PM and Dolwhatever.
I would estminate after walking across the Kokoda trail the 8th army arrives with about 25% effectiveness. Its enough.
If you wait for the intact divisions, you will allow the USN to have all its CVs ready. That means that it is a HUGE gamble.
There is no need, to gamble. Simply dont wait.
But you absolutely MUST place PM under close blockade.
That means take Gili Gili and use it to base re-fueling efforts at.
You can run bombardment out of Rabual, but I have found that
it consumes alot of fuel, and damages fleet assets.
Now you simply bomb and bombard the place until the anti-aircraft
no longer fires back. It is at that point you know you are ready.
Of course shoot down any C-47 or Bombers or both that are
desperately flying supply in.
If that anti-aircraft isnt firing back, that also means he can no longer attack. It is then that it is safe to move into the hex.
It doesnt matter how bad you are chopped up, if he cant attack you. After moving into the hex, shell him a couple times to get
a feel for the resistance, and then attack.
Usually it takes roughly a week of sustained attacks to take the place. If he reinforced it from Australia, he simply increases
the bag of prisoners. If you are REAL lucky, he will be unable to
transfer the air groups out. Nailing them is a HUGE plus.
Now the question I have for Mogami:
If you lose PM as the Allies, is it worth taking it back?
“It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.”
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
Air Replacements
This is really a question for Mogami:
How do you handle the vital asset attrition.
I cannot keep my Betty/Nell squadrons at full strength
EVEN by grounding them. Even search attrition exceeds
replacements. I can see Eight full strength Betty squadrons
with 200 Zeros escorting, could seriously embarass a USN
CV TF. But I cant seem to accumulate that many Bettys
(let alone zeros)
How do you handle the vital asset attrition.
I cannot keep my Betty/Nell squadrons at full strength
EVEN by grounding them. Even search attrition exceeds
replacements. I can see Eight full strength Betty squadrons
with 200 Zeros escorting, could seriously embarass a USN
CV TF. But I cant seem to accumulate that many Bettys
(let alone zeros)
“It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.”
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
Search
The Betty/Nell groups
I do not assign 100 percent to search/recon
I rest when tired.
I do not use the Nells as much (the groups all begin under stregth)
I do not fly in bad weather.
I use AV/CS/CA/CL airgroups for ASW/Search of/at advanced bases.
Irving replaces for recon of in range bases.
PBEM game has reached Nov 42. Currently have at least 6 full strength Betty Groups and 5 nearing full strentgh Nell groups
I do not assign 100 percent to search/recon
I rest when tired.
I do not use the Nells as much (the groups all begin under stregth)
I do not fly in bad weather.
I use AV/CS/CA/CL airgroups for ASW/Search of/at advanced bases.
Irving replaces for recon of in range bases.
PBEM game has reached Nov 42. Currently have at least 6 full strength Betty Groups and 5 nearing full strentgh Nell groups
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
re: Baseforces
After serveral games it is quite clear to me that your BF attrit
rapidly no matter what you do. Because of the OOB designations
Most of the usefull BF go to the 8th army, but not quite all.
I have found it all but immpossible to maintain more than three
airbases at 255. Usually it boils down to:
Port Moresby == 255 or close to it
Rabual == 255+
If luck and time permit, Lunga 150+
Truk I just leave one BF there and no others. My question is,
do you rotate the BF also with your troops?
rapidly no matter what you do. Because of the OOB designations
Most of the usefull BF go to the 8th army, but not quite all.
I have found it all but immpossible to maintain more than three
airbases at 255. Usually it boils down to:
Port Moresby == 255 or close to it
Rabual == 255+
If luck and time permit, Lunga 150+
Truk I just leave one BF there and no others. My question is,
do you rotate the BF also with your troops?
“It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.”
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
Base forces
Hi, Yes I rotate baseforces. But I do not maintain (or try to) bases with 255 support. (I don't place more then 4 groups at a base. (floatplanes not counted) Lunga is too far forward for me to load up. I build bases in range to support Lunga from amph attack. My aircraft are spread out
Truk (most groups stay up here till full strength
Rabaul Long range strike and short range ASW
Shortland Bombers and fighters with range to reach Lunga and ASW/Scout
Lunga Search/ASW/Recon Fighters for CAP and space reserved to move groups into.
PM Search/ASW/Recon Fighter and naval interdiction group
Gili (same as PM)
Vila Bombers to support Lunga ASW/Search
Woodlark Island Asw/Search Fighters to provide cover for transports
Gasmata ASW
Wewak ASW
Lae ASW/Recon
Kavieng ASW
Russell Island ASW/Search
Irau ASW/Search/Recon
Each of above bases has a baseforce (some of the smaller ASW bases only have AV supporting float planes
Combined fleet and 8th Area army maintain a reserve of 2 BF at Truk (and when a replacment is needed it goes south with other unit riding back.
But 3 more baseforce for each HQ would be nice.
Some of the HQ do also have air support to help bases they are deployed to.
Air HQ also help.
Truk (most groups stay up here till full strength
Rabaul Long range strike and short range ASW
Shortland Bombers and fighters with range to reach Lunga and ASW/Scout
Lunga Search/ASW/Recon Fighters for CAP and space reserved to move groups into.
PM Search/ASW/Recon Fighter and naval interdiction group
Gili (same as PM)
Vila Bombers to support Lunga ASW/Search
Woodlark Island Asw/Search Fighters to provide cover for transports
Gasmata ASW
Wewak ASW
Lae ASW/Recon
Kavieng ASW
Russell Island ASW/Search
Irau ASW/Search/Recon
Each of above bases has a baseforce (some of the smaller ASW bases only have AV supporting float planes
Combined fleet and 8th Area army maintain a reserve of 2 BF at Truk (and when a replacment is needed it goes south with other unit riding back.
But 3 more baseforce for each HQ would be nice.
Some of the HQ do also have air support to help bases they are deployed to.
Air HQ also help.
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
Re: Base forces
An interesting discussion, I have to agree with Mogami, because if you turn the strategy around: the Allies have two ways to get to Rabaul one is through PM and the other is through Lunga. The Japanese must deal with both approaches. They can only deal with PM by setting up an operation that will capture it before the Allies invade Lunga, if not they are will be faced with the old problem of a two front war with limited recourses.
I see Gili-Gili as a trap for the Japanese; it is within land-based air of Australia because of this it can be neutralized by airpower. By pounding PM from Rabaul until you can establish an air presents in the Buna area will allow the increased bombardment of PM and control of the supplies being sent to PM and provide protection for your invasion fleet or as the Japanese had to do the use of an overland route to PM. After the fall of PM, Gili-Gili will roll over and the southern route to Rabaul will be covered by airpower and distance, which can be traded for time if necessary. This will allow the Japanese to now concentrate on the Lunga area.
Carry on Mogami.
I see Gili-Gili as a trap for the Japanese; it is within land-based air of Australia because of this it can be neutralized by airpower. By pounding PM from Rabaul until you can establish an air presents in the Buna area will allow the increased bombardment of PM and control of the supplies being sent to PM and provide protection for your invasion fleet or as the Japanese had to do the use of an overland route to PM. After the fall of PM, Gili-Gili will roll over and the southern route to Rabaul will be covered by airpower and distance, which can be traded for time if necessary. This will allow the Japanese to now concentrate on the Lunga area.
Carry on Mogami.
PBEM
Hi, Oddly at present I am Japan in only 1 PBEM game (with U2)
i just can't get any one to let me be Japan. The Spooky post resulted in zero takers. (and is now out of date since versions have changed since it was posted)
i just can't get any one to let me be Japan. The Spooky post resulted in zero takers. (and is now out of date since versions have changed since it was posted)
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!
Rotation and PM
It is much harder for the Japanese to manage rotation than the allies. This reflects history and adds another weakness for Japan. I'm sure that I do a much better job rotating troops in/out of battle and harsh conditions than Japan did historically, but it is difficult not to overwork your assets as Japan. The variable and very variable reinforcement schedules can really impact this.
Mogami, I'll play you as Allies if you have room for a game.
rkaleel@carolina.rr.com
Mogami, I'll play you as Allies if you have room for a game.
rkaleel@carolina.rr.com
"Order AP Hill to prepare for battle" -- Stonewall Jackson
-
Inigo Montoya
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2002 3:25 pm
Let me see
Hi, Well I have to start a scenario 19 200 Japan 100 Allied variable
USN DC on Japanese sub doctrine On, FOW on 1 day turns with my good friend Erik R. If that is suitable for you I will just save the first turn into two slots and send it to each of you. Otherwise let me know what you want and I will see about getting another turn 1 done. (With all the PBEM traffic it might take a while. I plan on doing Eriks turn sometime today.)
USN DC on Japanese sub doctrine On, FOW on 1 day turns with my good friend Erik R. If that is suitable for you I will just save the first turn into two slots and send it to each of you. Otherwise let me know what you want and I will see about getting another turn 1 done. (With all the PBEM traffic it might take a while. I plan on doing Eriks turn sometime today.)
I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!