Page 3 of 4

RE: Korea 50-53

Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 1:04 pm
by John B.
I think that some of your US units have engineer capability.

RE: Korea 50-53

Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 9:24 pm
by DanNeely
ORIGINAL: John B.

In my experience they do respawn. It may be that they don't show up on the reinforcement chart until sufficient items/squads are available to rebuild them.

I know that was the case in ACOW, and would presume it's still true.

RE: Korea 50-53

Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2018 1:22 pm
by larryfulkerson
I almost forgot to grab a screenshot of the situation now. I'm moving all the ROK's to the west to build a front line
across the country and THEN start moving north.

Image

RE: Korea 50-53

Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2018 8:44 pm
by larryfulkerson
I spent most of my turn moving the ROK's out west and I've gained a lot of territory
and didn't run into very many NK's so the going was easy.

Image

RE: Korea 50-53

Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2018 10:31 pm
by MikeJ19
Larry,

Very interesting. I enjoy watching your games!

All the best,

RE: Korea 50-53

Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 9:15 am
by John B.
The ROK seems to be in pretty good shape all things considered. If he's that stretched out perhaps now is the time for an invasion.

RE: Korea 50-53

Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 11:28 am
by larryfulkerson
ORIGINAL: MikeJ19
Larry,

Very interesting. I enjoy watching your games!

All the best,
Thanks a lot for posting. Let's me know somebody is reading this thing. I do readily admit
however that I enjoy putting the AAR together. Makes me think about what I'm doing when I
play the game about what it "looks" like and how my readers will receive the news etc. I like
to post things that I think you guys might like to be in the loop about.
ORIGINAL: John B.
The ROK seems to be in pretty good shape all things considered. If he's that stretched out perhaps now is the time for an invasion.
Very observant of you to notice that I've given the ROK's time to refit and rest and as a result I
think they might really be combat worthy and I'm pushing them out west as a shakeout cruise kind of
thing where they won't be in the heat of things, can retreat if need be, and gain some real
estate at the same time. So far they are working out okie dokie. Most of the ROK divisions are
missing one or more regiments and / or their arty. One division is missing it's HQ. It'll spawn
sometime soon, I don't remember when right off the top of my head, but I know it's soon. One division
has a single regiment remaining of the division. No arty or engineers or recon or anything else, just
that one regiment so far.

The B-29' are coming in handy for unentrenching those large NKPA stacks. I guess that's part of what
the CS mission does. I've got everybody on CS except for the B-29's ( which are on INT missions )
because of the house rule about B-29's not being able to fly CS missions. I broke a lot of bridges
with them and I notice that none of the broken bridges are repaired yet. And I found at least 15
engineer units on my side ready to repair the heck out of those bridges if and when I get to them.

I'm trying to form a front line across the country and then advance northward clearing out the real
estate as I go. I toyed with the "finger advance" approach but there's only two main avenues leading
northward and I thought that was good enough for a two-fingered approach, following the main roads and
rails. That's the theory. Once I build a good pocket then I'll close it and mop up.

RE: Korea 50-53

Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 1:22 pm
by John B.
The ROK does respawn pretty fast and they can be fine against the NKPA but be careful when you come up against the ChiComs!

RE: Korea 50-53

Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2018 7:43 pm
by larryfulkerson
Here's the supply situation in South Korea right now.

Image

RE: Korea 50-53

Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 7:40 pm
by larryfulkerson
I just now watched the playback and I think I must be mistaken but I think I saw NK
troops moving north. Maybe they have already started building a new MLR further north.
Maybe they were really moving south and we'll see them in the front lines soon.

Image

RE: Korea 50-53

Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 7:45 pm
by John B.
He may be running away to avoid encirclement by invasion and to get his troops into better supply.

RE: Korea 50-53

Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 7:53 pm
by larryfulkerson
Andrey says his situation has collapsed when the bridges went down and the supply is non
existant down south and it's not fun anymore I suspect so we're stopping thing right here.



Image

RE: Korea 50-53

Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 7:58 pm
by larryfulkerson
ORIGINAL: John B.
He may be running away to avoid encirclement by invasion and to get his troops into better supply.
Further communication with Andrey revealed that the supply situation is unacceptable down south
so I suspect he's going to leave a skeleton staff and pull everybody else north to better supply.
Which may be a long march. He and I have quit the game anyway so maybe we'll never know.

RE: Korea 50-53

Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 9:15 pm
by John B.
That is really a shame and it's not fun to play if you're just getting crushed. But, the NKPA is pretty much doomed to destruction anyway. I figure you use it to put the serious hurt on the South Koreans and as much of the UN forces as you can. Then, you bide your time and you get to have fun again when the Chinese communists come in because they are a fightin' machine.

RE: Korea 50-53

Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 9:23 pm
by larryfulkerson
ORIGINAL: John B.
That is really a shame and it's not fun to play if you're just getting crushed. But, the NKPA is pretty much doomed to destruction anyway. I figure you use it to put the serious hurt on the South Koreans and as much of the UN forces as you can. Then, you bide your time and you get to have fun again when the Chinese communists come in because they are a fightin' machine.
I like to play TOAW IV and I suspect that Andrey does too but playing a game because of obligation
when it's not fun just burns you out. I don't want to do that to Andrey because I've been in that
situation and it's not much fun.

RE: Korea 50-53

Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 9:09 am
by John B.
Oh I meant no disrespect to Andrey I was simply commenting that there is more fun to come for the North Koreans if they want to hang in there.

RE: Korea 50-53

Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 10:41 am
by larryfulkerson
ORIGINAL: John B.
Oh I meant no disrespect to Andrey I was simply commenting that there is more fun to come for the North Koreans if they want to hang in there.
No disrespect was inferred my friend. It's all cool. I hope he's not got hurt feelings about how
the game turned out. It's not a fair scenario in that the UN troops have all kind of air power
and the NK dudes don't have B-29's and so it "feels" unbalanced when you try to play the NK side.
It takes more patience than I have to have fun after your supply situation collapses. Breaking
all those bridges devestated his supply I'm thinking. I would be tempted to leave South Korea
entirely. pull back to the north and better supply.

RE: Korea 50-53

Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 7:34 pm
by DanNeely
AFAIK the collapse in supply was historic and a big part of why the NKPA wasn't able to breach the Pusan perimeter. I haven't played this version of the scenario, but it definitely was the case in the older one that shipped with ACOW.

It it wasn't for better/worse than historic performance being able to shift the outcome in phase 3 of the war, I'd almost recommend a scenario that skipped the initial UN route, and the following NKPA route following Inchon; and then begin with the US getting close enough to the Yalu that China was making noises that sounded ominous to everybody but bugout doug.

RE: Korea 50-53

Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 2:12 am
by larryfulkerson
ORIGINAL: DanNeely
AFAIK the collapse in supply was historic and a big part of why the NKPA wasn't able to breach the Pusan perimeter. I haven't played this version of the scenario, but it definitely was the case in the older one that shipped with ACOW.

It it wasn't for better/worse than historic performance being able to shift the outcome in phase 3 of the war, I'd almost recommend a scenario that skipped the initial UN route, and the following NKPA route following Inchon; and then begin with the US getting close enough to the Yalu that China was making noises that sounded ominous to everybody but bugout doug.
A scenario that starts with the Inchon landing sounds like fun for the Allies but the NKPA army
might not like their circumstances. Or maybe the scenario could abstract that for us, the part
that happend in the south, so the player can concentrate on getting ashore at Inchon and moving
north just to meet the Chinese.

Either way it's not a very fun scenario for the North Koreans.

RE: Korea 50-53

Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 8:55 am
by John B.
I actually enjoy being the NKPA. You get the bash on the South Koreans, take the 1-1000 shot that you get to Pusan and then wait for the Chinese counter attack. Korea is a good situation for gaming because each side gets time periods when it is on top of the world and can do no wrong. Much more fun than being france in 1940 or Russia in 1941 (hey, I only lost 2 million men this turn I am kicking a**).