Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Day Time Surface Combat at 42,63

Japanese Ships
ML Ikitsushima, Shell hits 16, on fire, heavy damage
AP Africa Maru
AP Kashiwa Maru
AK Milan Maru
AP Tarushima Maru, Shell hits 2, on fire
AP Tatsujin Maru
AP Tatsuta Maru, Shell hits 1
AP Teiryu Maru, Shell hits 2
AP Toyo Maru #2
AP Ujigawa Maru
AP Yamafuku Maru
AP Zyuyo Maru
AP Chinko Maru
AK Tokiwasan Maru

Allied Ships
CA Houston
CL Java
CL De Ruyter
CL Tromp
CL Dragon
CL Durban
CL Marblehead
CL Boise
DD Alden
DD Barker
DD Bulmer
DD Edsall
DD John D. Edwards
DD Paul Jones
DD Parrott
DD Whipple
DD Stewart
DD Banckert
DD Van Nes
DD Witte de With
DD Evertsen
DD Kortenaer
DD Piet Hein
DD Van Ghent

Japanese ground losses:
32 casualties reported

----

Dear Mr. Frag:

In the "real world" a daytime surface combat between a dozen AP's and 5 or 6 DDs would have seen every last AP sunk and almost all of there troops drowned.

Here in the WitP world, on the 16th, 7 cruisers and 15 DDs sank about one AP, with a loss of 32 for the Japanese. How the rest got away is mysterious. They certainly could not have outrun DDs and cruisers. This would not have been possible in the real world EVEN if they were completely out of ammo - they would simply have rammed every last one of them. Primative but effective.

Only in a night action would it be possible for such an odd result to come about, and for night-combat trained fleets (everyone except the Italians?) even then it would be highly unlikely.

Conclusion: the surface combat algorithms for DAYLIGHT combat need an overhaul.

Yours,

Tondern

The ML committed suicide to allow the others to flee. Fairly standard happening. The only time you will see a massacre is when the transports are alone.

Morale of the story: Always have some suicide ships in your TF to take the brunt of the attack.

Btw: not only were they out of ammo after multiple bombardment runs, they also were pretty much out of fuel. Tough to get a commander aggressive enough to pursue with no ammo and no fuel.

the way I understand the hq rules are the units are assigned to a hq, and some are restricted.. cannot a restriced hq in china mount an offensive towards burma.. or are they all in north or northeatern china? I was thinking about using the forces attacking the coastal cities, swingind down the coast and into buma

An allied china unit or a japanese china unit? (assuming allied china) The trail path from china to burma is there but brutal to cross. I don't remember the exact line on the map that controls the restriction but I think it includes this section as valid.

You can transfer units to an unrestricted hq and use them anywhere once done.

ORIGINAL: tondern

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Day Time Surface Combat at 42,63

Japanese Ships
ML Ikitsushima, Shell hits 16, on fire, heavy damage
AP Africa Maru
AP Kashiwa Maru
AK Milan Maru
AP Tarushima Maru, Shell hits 2, on fire
AP Tatsujin Maru
AP Tatsuta Maru, Shell hits 1
AP Teiryu Maru, Shell hits 2
AP Toyo Maru #2
AP Ujigawa Maru
AP Yamafuku Maru
AP Zyuyo Maru
AP Chinko Maru
AK Tokiwasan Maru

Allied Ships
CA Houston
CL Java
CL De Ruyter
CL Tromp
CL Dragon
CL Durban
CL Marblehead
CL Boise
DD Alden
DD Barker
DD Bulmer
DD Edsall
DD John D. Edwards
DD Paul Jones
DD Parrott
DD Whipple
DD Stewart
DD Banckert
DD Van Nes
DD Witte de With
DD Evertsen
DD Kortenaer
DD Piet Hein
DD Van Ghent

Japanese ground losses:
32 casualties reported

----

Dear Mr. Frag:

In the "real world" a daytime surface combat between a dozen AP's and 5 or 6 DDs would have seen every last AP sunk and almost all of there troops drowned.

Here in the WitP world, on the 16th, 7 cruisers and 15 DDs sank about one AP, with a loss of 32 for the Japanese. How the rest got away is mysterious. They certainly could not have outrun DDs and cruisers. This would not have been possible in the real world EVEN if they were completely out of ammo - they would simply have rammed every last one of them. Primative but effective.

Only in a night action would it be possible for such an odd result to come about, and for night-combat trained fleets (everyone except the Italians?) even then it would be highly unlikely.

Conclusion: the surface combat algorithms for DAYLIGHT combat need an overhaul.

Yours,

Tondern

60 mile hex. Convoy gets word that enemy TF is approaching and is ordered to scatter. Weather is not good and the Allied TF is worried about a Japanese carrier operating nearby and land based airpower that has been routinely striking ships in the area. Finding a few ships fleeing into rain squalls, they manage to get a few rounds off before a mistaken radar officer announces an inbound airstrike. The TF turns to take up AA positions. Confusion between Dutch and American ships causes several near collisions. The TF commander, realizing he has scattered the enemy TF, decides to withdraw towards his base and friendly airpower. It happned all the time. Much more than the inverse (a TF badly mauled in a surface battle). The Battle of Komandorski Island is one of my favorites and is a great example of many strange things happening causing an outcome that one would only expect in Hollywood (if you just looked at the lineup of surface ships and nothing else).

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag
Tough to get a commander aggressive enough to pursue with no ammo and no fuel.

Defeatist talk like that will lose the war, mister!

An allied china unit or a japanese china unit? (assuming allied china) The trail path from china to burma is there but brutal to cross. I don't remember the exact line on the map that controls the restriction but I think it includes this section as valid.

You can transfer units to an unrestricted hq and use them anywhere once done.

An allied china unit or a japanese china unit? (assuming allied china) The trail path from china to burma is there but brutal to cross. I don't remember the exact line on the map that controls the restriction but I think it includes this section as valid.

You can transfer units to an unrestricted hq and use them anywhere once done.

Ok that last part is clear, so a ja hq with units attacking hong Kong, has a restriction that does what exactly? restricts them to an area> or zone? It seems that to have a fighting chance the jap player should be free to use these china based forces to quickly attack south east asia and India... I am just looking for an edge in 42 so that in 43 my ijn and ija fiorces can have a chance whithout the heavy use of the editor

Above should have been double qoutes to .. once done"
sorry[:-]

ORIGINAL: freeboy

An allied china unit or a japanese china unit? (assuming allied china) The trail path from china to burma is there but brutal to cross. I don't remember the exact line on the map that controls the restriction but I think it includes this section as valid.

You can transfer units to an unrestricted hq and use them anywhere once done.

An allied china unit or a japanese china unit? (assuming allied china) The trail path from china to burma is there but brutal to cross. I don't remember the exact line on the map that controls the restriction but I think it includes this section as valid.

You can transfer units to an unrestricted hq and use them anywhere once done.

Ok that last part is clear, so a ja hq with units attacking hong Kong, has a restriction that does what exactly? restricts them to an area> or zone? It seems that to have a fighting chance the jap player should be free to use these china based forces to quickly attack south east asia and India... I am just looking for an edge in 42 so that in 43 my ijn and ija fiorces can have a chance whithout the heavy use of the editor

There a question hiding in there? [;)]

in 42 you have all the troops you need to deal with the Brits in Burma.

in 43 you will have freed up the Malaya troops completely to continue to keep the Brits out.

44/45 is the issue.

If you are looking at it from the Allied side, concentration of force is the key. Fight at one spot and throw the kitchen sink in. You have nothing to loose because you have already lost. This area of the map just ties Japan up so they can't be defending against the USA. [:D]

Hard to believe we both speak english, well canadian on your side.. so
A) What does a restricted HQ fro the ja mean? Does it restrict lcu to a zone?
thanks again.. this ? was camoflagued above

Japan Restrictions are completely different then Allied restrictions.

Basically, they stop you from stripping the home islands.

China is controlled though having to maintain troop levels in each base to prevent uprisings.

You have to go through china to get to burma. each time you take a base, you have to leave troops behind to keep it funtional. By the time you'd get there, you'll have little left.

ORIGINAL: freeboy

Hard to believe we both speak english, well canadian on your side.. so
A) What does a restricted HQ fro the ja mean? Does it restrict lcu to a zone?
thanks again.. this ? was camoflagued above

Well I love to speak Canadian. It's great. I love saying Hoser and "eh". It makes me so happy. It's like saying Gretzky was a hoser and Berry Melrose says "eh" a lot.

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

ORIGINAL: tondern

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Day Time Surface Combat at 42,63

Japanese Ships
ML Ikitsushima, Shell hits 16, on fire, heavy damage
AP Africa Maru
AP Kashiwa Maru
AK Milan Maru
AP Tarushima Maru, Shell hits 2, on fire
AP Tatsujin Maru
AP Tatsuta Maru, Shell hits 1
AP Teiryu Maru, Shell hits 2
AP Toyo Maru #2
AP Ujigawa Maru
AP Yamafuku Maru
AP Zyuyo Maru
AP Chinko Maru
AK Tokiwasan Maru

Allied Ships
CA Houston
CL Java
CL De Ruyter
CL Tromp
CL Dragon
CL Durban
CL Marblehead
CL Boise
DD Alden
DD Barker
DD Bulmer
DD Edsall
DD John D. Edwards
DD Paul Jones
DD Parrott
DD Whipple
DD Stewart
DD Banckert
DD Van Nes
DD Witte de With
DD Evertsen
DD Kortenaer
DD Piet Hein
DD Van Ghent

Japanese ground losses:
32 casualties reported

----

Dear Mr. Frag:

In the "real world" a daytime surface combat between a dozen AP's and 5 or 6 DDs would have seen every last AP sunk and almost all of there troops drowned.

Here in the WitP world, on the 16th, 7 cruisers and 15 DDs sank about one AP, with a loss of 32 for the Japanese. How the rest got away is mysterious. They certainly could not have outrun DDs and cruisers. This would not have been possible in the real world EVEN if they were completely out of ammo - they would simply have rammed every last one of them. Primative but effective.

Only in a night action would it be possible for such an odd result to come about, and for night-combat trained fleets (everyone except the Italians?) even then it would be highly unlikely.

Conclusion: the surface combat algorithms for DAYLIGHT combat need an overhaul.

Yours,

Tondern

60 mile hex. Convoy gets word that enemy TF is approaching and is ordered to scatter. Weather is not good and the Allied TF is worried about a Japanese carrier operating nearby and land based airpower that has been routinely striking ships in the area. Finding a few ships fleeing into rain squalls, they manage to get a few rounds off before a mistaken radar officer announces an inbound airstrike. The TF turns to take up AA positions. Confusion between Dutch and American ships causes several near collisions. The TF commander, realizing he has scattered the enemy TF, decides to withdraw towards his base and friendly airpower. It happned all the time. Much more than the inverse (a TF badly mauled in a surface battle). The Battle of Komandorski Island is one of my favorites and is a great example of many strange things happening causing an outcome that one would only expect in Hollywood (if you just looked at the lineup of surface ships and nothing else).

Joel. I would like to discuss this a bit with you. He has a legit point. Dev forum?

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

ORIGINAL: tondern

ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag

Day Time Surface Combat at 42,63

Japanese Ships
ML Ikitsushima, Shell hits 16, on fire, heavy damage
AP Africa Maru
AP Kashiwa Maru
AK Milan Maru
AP Tarushima Maru, Shell hits 2, on fire
AP Tatsujin Maru
AP Tatsuta Maru, Shell hits 1
AP Teiryu Maru, Shell hits 2
AP Toyo Maru #2
AP Ujigawa Maru
AP Yamafuku Maru
AP Zyuyo Maru
AP Chinko Maru
AK Tokiwasan Maru

Allied Ships
CA Houston
CL Java
CL De Ruyter
CL Tromp
CL Dragon
CL Durban
CL Marblehead
CL Boise
DD Alden
DD Barker
DD Bulmer
DD Edsall
DD John D. Edwards
DD Paul Jones
DD Parrott
DD Whipple
DD Stewart
DD Banckert
DD Van Nes
DD Witte de With
DD Evertsen
DD Kortenaer
DD Piet Hein
DD Van Ghent

Japanese ground losses:
32 casualties reported

----

Dear Mr. Frag:

In the "real world" a daytime surface combat between a dozen AP's and 5 or 6 DDs would have seen every last AP sunk and almost all of there troops drowned.

Here in the WitP world, on the 16th, 7 cruisers and 15 DDs sank about one AP, with a loss of 32 for the Japanese. How the rest got away is mysterious. They certainly could not have outrun DDs and cruisers. This would not have been possible in the real world EVEN if they were completely out of ammo - they would simply have rammed every last one of them. Primative but effective.

Only in a night action would it be possible for such an odd result to come about, and for night-combat trained fleets (everyone except the Italians?) even then it would be highly unlikely.

Conclusion: the surface combat algorithms for DAYLIGHT combat need an overhaul.

Yours,

Tondern

60 mile hex. Convoy gets word that enemy TF is approaching and is ordered to scatter. Weather is not good and the Allied TF is worried about a Japanese carrier operating nearby and land based airpower that has been routinely striking ships in the area. Finding a few ships fleeing into rain squalls, they manage to get a few rounds off before a mistaken radar officer announces an inbound airstrike. The TF turns to take up AA positions. Confusion between Dutch and American ships causes several near collisions. The TF commander, realizing he has scattered the enemy TF, decides to withdraw towards his base and friendly airpower. It happned all the time. Much more than the inverse (a TF badly mauled in a surface battle). The Battle of Komandorski Island is one of my favorites and is a great example of many strange things happening causing an outcome that one would only expect in Hollywood (if you just looked at the lineup of surface ships and nothing else).

JOEL. So we are basically to believe that this particular daylight surface action was that
one-in-a-hundred, extreme end-of-the-possibility-table, won't happen again in an entire
game result? If that is the case, your explanation makes sense. Otherwise, Tondern's
point looks pretty valid..., there isn't even a "Jarvis Bay" to go down valiantly buying
time for the rest to scatter. And there are more pursuing ships than targets. Your ex-
planation is valid for a very unusual set of conditions, confusion, and weather..., but I
certainly hope you all have tested to make sure it is a very unusual result as well.

As someone said, British and Indian troops were also dealing with unrest in India during the war. Why is there not a rule as the China occupation forces for the British in India ? Or is there one ? That will mean that no unhistorical reinforcement of Burma is possible, or that at least it will have a cost (in political points or in guerilla units appearing in India) ?

There was a little risk for indian unrest in 1942, but most indian leaders wanted to take a peaceful course towards independence (Gandhi and Nehru). Bose, who wanted to fight on the axis side, had already left india in 1941. after 1943, there was no serious risk for indian unrest anymore.
i don't see a reason for treating british in India the same as japanese in china. the whole situation was a different one, regarding every single aspect.

There were no wide-scale revolt in Indian attempted or planned, but there were certainly a lost of unrest in summer 1942 and around one thousand dead in riots. And that is when British and Indian military units were available to protect British citizens and factories.

I agree that there are differences between India and China situations. A Chinese hex without any IJN garnison should produce nothing for Japan, while an Indian hex without any Allied garnison will have a reduced output.

ORIGINAL: sven6345789

There was a little risk for indian unrest in 1942, but most indian leaders wanted to take a peaceful course towards independence (Gandhi and Nehru). Bose, who wanted to fight on the axis side, had already left india in 1941. after 1943, there was no serious risk for indian unrest anymore.
i don't see a reason for treating british in India the same as japanese in china. the whole situation was a different one, regarding every single aspect.

We can see the situation perfectly using hindsight.

I agree that the situation was different between China and India.

However, the British were always wary of the possibility of unrest and revolts in India. Therefore, in order to prevent unrest, the British stationed troops throughout India.

Agitation for the end of British rule in India had existed for decades prior to the outbreak of the Second World War.

Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose was a lawyer from Calcutta and an ex-president of the Indian National Congress who was a major rival to Mahatma Gandhi for the popular leadership of the movement to end British rule in India. Unlike Gandhi, however, Bose was a not averse to the use of violence in the achievement of Indian independence. Using the old adage that "my enemy's enemy is my friend", Bose saw war between Britain and Germany as an opportunity to advance the cause of India's independence from the British Empire.

Thus on 17th January 1941, Bose escaped from under British surveillance at his house in Calcutta and with the assistance of the Abwehr (Wehrmacht Military Intelligence) he made his way to Peshawar on India's North West frontier with Afghanistan. There, supporters of the Aga Khan helped him across the border into Afghanistan where he was met by an Abwehr unit posing as a party of road construction engineers from the Organization Todt who then aided his passage across Afghanistan via Kabul to the border with Soviet Russia. Once in Russia the NKVD transported Bose to Moscow where he hoped that Russia's traditional enmity to British rule in India would result in support for his plans for a popular rising in India. However, Bose found the Soviets' response disappointing and was rapidly passed over to the German Ambassador in Moscow, Count von der Schulenberg. He had Bose flown on to Berlin in a special courier aircraft at the beginning of April where he was to receive a more favorable hearing from von Rippentrop and the Foreign Ministry officials at the Wilhelmstrasse.

Almost immediately Bose commenced broadcasting for the Germans from the Azad Hind transmitter at Nauen and later used the good favor he had established with Hitler to have himself named as leader of the Indian "Government-in-exile" or "Indian National Congress".

But Bose was intent on more direct opposition to the British than merely radio propaganda and was handed an opportunity almost immediately when in April 1941 most of the members of the British 3rd (Indian) Motorised Brigade were taken prisoner by Generalleutnant Rommel's Deutsche Afrika Korps at El Mekili in Cyreniaca (Libya). On 15th May a Luftwaffe Major was sent to interview English speaking members of the prisoners with a view to recruiting men for a proposed German Army (Heer) unit of Indian troops.

More on the Burma/India situation:

For the Japanese, attacking India, in the hopes of disrupting the British Empire, was a possibility. Even a fairly small attack, with shrewd political maneuvering (which the Japanese never did in this period), might create a revolt that would turn India over to the Japanese. However, the Army refused to supply troops for even an assault on the island of Ceylon.

The main advantage of this course of action was that it had the potential, with European Axis help, to actually clear a flank. The Japanese could have gone into the Indian Ocean with enough force to capture naval bases and dominate the sealanes. One of those particular sealanes was the lifeline of the British Army in North Africa, and Japan could have severed that connection. This would have given the Axis, working together, a conquest of North Africa, the Middle East, and pretty much the entire Indian Ocean area.

The main disadvantage is that it would leave the United States mostly unengaged. The main reason it wasn't tried was that Japan and Germany never seriously thought about cooperating with each other.

However, the British were always wary of the possibility of unrest and revolts in India. Therefore, in order to prevent unrest, the British stationed troops throughout India.

Which is why I still think there should be a PP cost for stripping British troops en masse from India to defend Burma.

As for the surface combat against the APs, I don't have a big problem with it. As Joel says, it's a 60-mile hex.

JOEL. So we are basically to believe that this particular daylight surface action was that
one-in-a-hundred, extreme end-of-the-possibility-table, won't happen again in an entire
game result? If that is the case, your explanation makes sense. Otherwise, Tondern's
point looks pretty valid..., there isn't even a "Jarvis Bay" to go down valiantly buying
time for the rest to scatter. And there are more pursuing ships than targets. Your ex-
planation is valid for a very unusual set of conditions, confusion, and weather..., but I
certainly hope you all have tested to make sure it is a very unusual result as well.

Mike, how many ships were sunk at Jutland? What range were they from each other?

It is the single largest collection of ships in a small area in the history of naval conflicts with the largest number of guns ever assembled. Even WWII has nothing to match it and they were both trying to sink ships, not flee.