Matrix Games Forums

Posted: **Tue Apr 19, 2016 12:03 am**

Playing this game at all isn't about 'have to'. [:D]

Seriously, maybe I can make 2 to 1, I'm not sure. I assume (without doing any calculations) that I would need to harvest more strategic bombing points. DAW HQ has the Home Islands under a swarm of fighters. From here on out, Hokkaido might be the 'easiest' operation remaining after the current crop underway.

Posted: **Tue Apr 19, 2016 2:49 am**

How is the Japanese bomber force in the Home Islands? How about shore bombarding with BBs and use carrier task forces for CAP and hitting airfields? Maybe after the air and sea units in the Southern Resource Area are freed up?

Posted: **Tue Apr 19, 2016 3:02 am**

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

How is the Japanese bomber force in the Home Islands? How about shore bombarding with BBs and use carrier task forces for CAP and hitting airfields? Maybe after the air and sea units in the Southern Resource Area are freed up?

The sea units there are largely freed up, but I need to keep the battleships and carriers intact for supporting invasions. Maybe eventually, but not anytime soon.

Posted: **Tue Apr 19, 2016 5:09 am**

I have to think that turning armor loose in the China plains is a better Expected Value than entangling with units on the home islands.
The AAR that currently has a home island invasion going is demonstrating how tedious it can be slogging it out in a war of attrition.

Korea might hold some hope given a need to defend a lot of locations including the home islands ...[8D]

Posted: **Tue Apr 19, 2016 7:24 am**

Wow, such a nice pace of updates. I kind of hope you and your opponent can keep it up!

Regarding the rest.... well it's of course 100% up to you but I still want to say my opinion.

If I were you, I'd go for the home islands. It's not a matter of victory points, but a matter of entertaining. It is likely possible to reach 2:1 with china and the rest but... would that be as satisfying? Personally, I think not. I would definitely want to invade japan, not for the points but for myself.

Of course this is just my 2 cents [:D]

Posted: **Tue Apr 19, 2016 12:18 pm**

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Recon shows 4 units remaining at Nago so I am not sure what to make of the "Unit(s) surrounded" message. Two divisions will be pulled off the beach now that the engineers are off the ships.

I also think this happens when units cannot retreat anymore. They then take additional damage (disabled and destroyed devices) not mentioned in the combat report. Unfortunately it also the message that is connected to the VP bug I mentioned some time ago. See michaelm's post below.

ORIGINAL: michaelm
Normal sequence is for units to become 'surrounded' and lose some devices for VPs. At some point, the units will start to fall to 'attrition'.
Often if the unit is already at the threshold, they jump straight to the 'attrition' part.

The bug I have found is that when the unit is 'surrounded', it loses some devices (and you get the VPs), BUT then is removed from the map

or in the unofficial beta notes

ORIGINAL: michaelm
26/09/2015:
Fix case where surrounded units disappearing without VPs
Fix surrounded units having disabled devices doubled each time checked (and then above bug kicked in)

Posted: **Tue Apr 19, 2016 12:47 pm**

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

I have to think that turning armor loose in the China plains is a better Expected Value than entangling with units on the home islands.
The AAR that currently has a home island invasion going is demonstrating how tedious it can be slogging it out in a war of attrition.

Korea might hold some hope given a need to defend a lot of locations including the home islands ...[8D]

Putting various posts and answers together... The forces now in China will either largely or completely stay there for the foreseeable future. There is plenty of armor in the spearhead, that spearhead being currently engaged at Canton-Hong Kong, and planned to advance (up the corridor shown on a map a few days ago) to the plains. Hokkaido is going to be taken in entirety. The islands between Okinawa and Kyushu, and the islands north of them, and possibly as far as the islands between Korea and the Home Islands are all under consideration for the purposes of supporting further operations and completely cutting off imports to the Home Islands.

I am not going to take the major forces now operating in the DEI and Malaya and put them in China where they would be stuck until the end of the game. The islands that complete isolation of Japan, or Korea which achieves the same thing, are more effective because they cut off all imports except Heavy Industry and factories. And those can be shut down from the air, especially with so much Imperial air defense strength tied to defending industry in the Home Islands.

I know that an HI invasion would be very tough. I am not even close to deciding exactly where, when, or how. But, for me in this contest, I am not trying to accumulate points as quickly as possible to win on points. It's about the journey. I do pay attention to points as a guide for how things are going - you don't exactly gain points for losing a major invasion fleet loaded with troops, and so on!

Korea has the advantages of cutting off Japan (takes the place of the islands west of Japan), has industry to stifle, could serve as a base for further invasions, provides bases for strategic bombing, and could serve as a base to trigger Soviet Activation. But Lowpe advises that Korea is likely to be heavily defended, and the amount of forces that would have to be destroyed or lured out of Manchuria to trigger Soviet Activation is on the order of (my interpretation) 8 to 12 divisions. A tough nut that will take a long time.

What about going into China instead with those forces? It is probably less strongly (or densely) held than Korea, which is good. But all the other items are negative compared to Korea. And due to the larger size of the areas of China that would be involved (compared to the size of Korea), it would take just as long to deal with because even though 'fighting' would be briefer 'moving around' would be a good deal longer.

So, for the additional forces not yet committed (DEI, etc), China is out. Korea is possible. The islands near Japan and Korea are possible. Japan is definite because I want to as part of the fun. We've been playing this PBM for about 4 1/2 years, guys!

All discussion welcome, including telling me I'm nuts. [8D]

Posted: **Tue Apr 19, 2016 12:48 pm**

ORIGINAL: Drakanel

Wow, such a nice pace of updates. I kind of hope you and your opponent can keep it up!

Regarding the rest.... well it's of course 100% up to you but I still want to say my opinion.

If I were you, I'd go for the home islands. It's not a matter of victory points, but a matter of entertaining. It is likely possible to reach 2:1 with china and the rest but... would that be as satisfying? Personally, I think not. I would definitely want to invade japan, not for the points but for myself.

Of course this is just my 2 cents [:D]

Just finished typing my response to Crackaces' post so I didn't see this until now.

Well put!

Posted: **Tue Apr 19, 2016 12:54 pm**

ORIGINAL: Rafid

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Recon shows 4 units remaining at Nago so I am not sure what to make of the "Unit(s) surrounded" message. Two divisions will be pulled off the beach now that the engineers are off the ships.
I also think this happens when units cannot retreat anymore. They then take additional damage (disabled and destroyed devices) not mentioned in the combat report. Unfortunately it also the message that is connected to the VP bug I mentioned some time ago. See michaelm's post below.

ORIGINAL: michaelm
Normal sequence is for units to become 'surrounded' and lose some devices for VPs. At some point, the units will start to fall to 'attrition'.
Often if the unit is already at the threshold, they jump straight to the 'attrition' part.

The bug I have found is that when the unit is 'surrounded', it loses some devices (and you get the VPs), BUT then is removed from the map
or in the unofficial beta notes

ORIGINAL: michaelm
26/09/2015:
Fix case where surrounded units disappearing without VPs
Fix surrounded units having disabled devices doubled each time checked (and then above bug kicked in)

Thanks! We upgraded to the newest Beta a couple of weeks ago, so we are no longer experiencing that VP bug.

As far as the damage outside of the combat report goes, I don't think it's the result of no retreat path. I think it also happens to units with a retreat path, it's just that they get retreated by a losing combat and so they avoid continually getting hit by other LCUs. With no retreat path they have to stay in the hex (unless they are ordered to move, which takes time) and get attacked maybe every turn.

It was easy to see in the early game as Allies with all the units that were eventually destroyed in the PI and DEI. It's the lack of supply, and that is made worse with each attack the unit suffers (independent of the damage from the attack).

Posted: **Tue Apr 19, 2016 1:42 pm**

Ok, nice answers.[:)]

I can remember chiding Jocke for not invading Honshu against Obvert. He had fought that far, suffered so much, how could you not want to do the ultimate Allied Fan Boy thrill?

Posted: **Tue Apr 19, 2016 2:29 pm**

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Ok, nice answers.[:)]

I can remember chiding Jocke for not invading Honshu against Obvert. He had fought that far, suffered so much, how could you not want to do the ultimate Allied Fan Boy thrill?

Because it Could have been even worse than him trying for Korea, and you know how much that cost! [;)]

Without stacking limits in that game he could have done it, but with SL it's a lot harder to get off the beachheads.

Hokkaido is the HI, and if you can get there, there is very little reason to go to Honshu/Kyushu. It has plentiful good airfields and ports, and those will allow the Allies to stifle the rest easily.

Posted: **Tue Apr 19, 2016 2:53 pm**

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Ok, nice answers.[:)]

I can remember chiding Jocke for not invading Honshu against Obvert. He had fought that far, suffered so much, how could you not want to do the ultimate Allied Fan Boy thrill?

Because it Could have been even worse than him trying for Korea, and you know how much that cost! [;)]

Without stacking limits in that game he could have done it, but with SL it's a lot harder to get off the beachheads.

Hokkaido is the HI, and if you can get there, there is very little reason to go to Honshu/Kyushu. It has plentiful good airfields and ports, and those will allow the Allies to stifle the rest easily.

I've looked at ranges from Hokkaido to the rest of the HI, and I would like better bases closer the opposite end of HI from Hokkaido.

Posted: **Tue Apr 19, 2016 4:15 pm**

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Ok, nice answers.[:)]

I can remember chiding Jocke for not invading Honshu against Obvert. He had fought that far, suffered so much, how could you not want to do the ultimate Allied Fan Boy thrill?

Because it Could have been even worse than him trying for Korea, and you know how much that cost! [;)]

Without stacking limits in that game he could have done it, but with SL it's a lot harder to get off the beachheads.

Hokkaido is the HI, and if you can get there, there is very little reason to go to Honshu/Kyushu. It has plentiful good airfields and ports, and those will allow the Allies to stifle the rest easily.
I've looked at ranges from Hokkaido to the rest of the HI, and I would like better bases closer the opposite end of HI from Hokkaido.

Okinawa can hit the rest from that side, or China, or Korea if you go there. No need for Honshu/Kyushu is all I mean.

Posted: **Tue Apr 19, 2016 4:23 pm**

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: witpqs

ORIGINAL: obvert

Because it Could have been even worse than him trying for Korea, and you know how much that cost! [;)]

Without stacking limits in that game he could have done it, but with SL it's a lot harder to get off the beachheads.

Hokkaido is the HI, and if you can get there, there is very little reason to go to Honshu/Kyushu. It has plentiful good airfields and ports, and those will allow the Allies to stifle the rest easily.
I've looked at ranges from Hokkaido to the rest of the HI, and I would like better bases closer the opposite end of HI from Hokkaido.

Okinawa can hit the rest from that side, or China, or Korea if you go there. No need for Honshu/Kyushu is all I mean.

But Shikoku can be a nice little enclave - three bases, limited access by land. Close to Hiroshima, Osaka and Nagoya. Great place to put bombers with shorter range,

Posted: **Tue Apr 19, 2016 6:10 pm**

1944 December 19

The Empire captured:

The Allies captured:
Masbate is occupied by the Allies

There were Imperial amphibious or airborne operations at:

There were Allied amphibious or airborne operations at:
Kume-jima

Imperial Naval Bombardments

Allied Naval Bombardments:
Allied Ships Bombarding Amami Oshima
Allied Ships Bombarding Amami Oshima
Allied Ships Bombarding Kume-jima
Allied Ships Bombarding Amami Oshima
Allied Ships Bombarding Kume-jima
Allied Ships Bombarding enemy troops at Nago
Allied Ships Bombarding Kume-jima
Allied Ships Bombarding Kume-jima
Allied Ships Bombarding Kume-jima
Allied Ships Bombarding Kume-jima
Allied Ships Bombarding Amami Oshima

Our subs *$&(^$(^)^)%&%#!&

Still moving as needed in China. Might have caught some Imperials on the road between Kweilin and Hengyang, will attack if they are still in hex tomorrow. DAW HQ is dispatching units west out of Kweiyang to keep an exit open for units still off that road to the south. We should be able to block them.

Zombie duty at Kuantan.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Kuantan (51,79)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 2391 troops, 40 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 76

Defending force 2188 troops, 15 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 36

Allied adjusted assault: 68

Japanese adjusted defense: 19

Allied assault odds: 3 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), preparation(-), fatigue(-), morale(-)
experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker: leaders(+)

Japanese ground losses:
41 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

Allied ground losses:
15 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Assaulting units:
50th Indian Para Brigade

Defending units:
4th INA Nehru Regiment
43rd Const Co
4th Field Construction Battalion
36th JAAF AF Bn

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Highest disruption at Singapore is 24%, so I'm guessing two more days of rest. The division and brigade from the NW have entered Palembang and taken up attack positions for the day after tomorrow. The forces from the SW have made 22 miles and will remain in move mode for another day.

The NZ 15th Bde has reached Digos and will attack.

The IJN must have felt vibes from our discussions about what is left of the IJN and decided to be heard!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Amami Oshima at 98,64, Range 2,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
DD Maki, Shell hits 2
DD Kiri
DD Kashi, Shell hits 2
DD Kaya, Shell hits 5, heavy fires, heavy damage

Allied Ships
CA Salt Lake City, Shell hits 2
DD Evans, Shell hits 1
DD Franks
DD Uhlmann, Shell hits 28, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk

Reduced visibility due to Thunderstorms with 21% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Thunderstorms and 21% moonlight: 2,000 yards
Range closes to 24,000 yards...
Range closes to 18,000 yards...
Range closes to 12,000 yards...
Range closes to 8,000 yards...
Range closes to 6,000 yards...
Range closes to 4,000 yards...
Range closes to 2,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 2,000 yards
CONTACT: Allied lookouts spot Japanese task force at 2,000 yards
DD Kaya engages CA Salt Lake City at 2,000 yards
DD Kashi engages DD Uhlmann at 2,000 yards
DD Kashi engages DD Franks at 2,000 yards
DD Evans engages DD Maki at 2,000 yards
CA Salt Lake City engages DD Kaya at 2,000 yards
DD Uhlmann engages DD Kashi at 2,000 yards
DD Kiri engages DD Evans at 2,000 yards
DD Uhlmann sunk by DD Maki at 2,000 yards
Range increases to 5,000 yards
CA Salt Lake City engages DD Kiri at 5,000 yards
DD Kashi engages DD Franks at 5,000 yards
DD Kaya engages DD Evans at 5,000 yards
Range increases to 6,000 yards
DD Kaya engages DD Franks at 6,000 yards
DD Kashi engages DD Franks at 6,000 yards
DD Kaya engages DD Evans at 6,000 yards
Range increases to 7,000 yards
CA Salt Lake City engages DD Maki at 7,000 yards
DD Kiri engages DD Franks at 7,000 yards
DD Kiri engages DD Franks at 7,000 yards
Task forces break off...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The cruiser bombardments of Amami Oshima were not interrupted, because the Salt Lake City task force was on guard duty.

More progress at Nago and a good landing result at Kume-Jima.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Nago (95,65)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 22447 troops, 519 guns, 1164 vehicles, Assault Value = 1481

Defending force 10139 troops, 53 guns, 26 vehicles, Assault Value = 10

Allied adjusted assault: 590

Japanese adjusted defense: 7

Allied assault odds: 84 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), disruption(-), fatigue(-), supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
2182 casualties reported
Squads: 184 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 17 destroyed, 62 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 18 (18 destroyed, 0 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
65 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 4 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 2 (1 destroyed, 1 disabled)
Vehicles lost 9 (1 destroyed, 8 disabled)

Assaulting units:
77th Infantry Division
2nd USMC Tank Battalion
716th Tank Battalion
670th Tank Destroyer Battalion
193rd Tank Battalion
194th Tank Battalion
5th Marine Division
111th(Sep) Infantry Regiment
766th Tank Battalion
1st USMC Tank Battalion
710th Tank Battalion
767th Tank Battalion
4th USMC Field Artillery Battalion
40th US Naval Construction Battalion
868th Aviation Engineer Battalion
25th Infantry Division
26th USN Naval Construction Regiment
10th USMC Field Artillery Battalion
30th USN Naval Construction Regiment
39th US Naval Construction Battalion
2nd USMC Field Artillery Battalion
16th USN Naval Construction Regiment
4th Pioneer Battalion
1st USMC Field Artillery Battalion
40th Infantry Division
11th USMC Field Artillery Battalion
8th AmphTrac Engineer Battalion
31st USN Naval Construction Regiment

Defending units:
9th Ind.Mixed Brigade
45th Ind.Mixed Brigade
31st Army
72nd Air Flotilla

Japanese Unit(s) surrounded at Nago
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Kume-jima (94,65)

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 5365 troops, 60 guns, 52 vehicles, Assault Value = 180

Defending force 4060 troops, 51 guns, 11 vehicles, Assault Value = 88

Allied adjusted assault: 131

Japanese adjusted defense: 47

Allied assault odds: 2 to 1 (fort level 3)

Allied Assault reduces fortifications to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), forts(+), leaders(+), disruption(-)
experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker: shock(+), leaders(+)

Japanese ground losses:
140 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 11 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 3 (2 destroyed, 1 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
909 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 35 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 10 disabled
Engineers: 6 destroyed, 39 disabled
Vehicles lost 3 (1 destroyed, 2 disabled)

Assaulting units:
102nd(Sep) Infantry Regiment
131st Cmbt Engineer Regiment
110th Cmbt Engineer Battalion

Defending units:
50th Ind.Mixed Brigade

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are still 4 units seen at Nago but troop count is down to ~18,000. Tomorrow's attack will be larger as all remaining assault units will participate, but all the battleships will be working at Kume-Jima. I don't think that will be a hindrance.

The landing at Kume-Jima went very well with even the landing craft gunboats disabling a number of defender squads. Our troops must rest. Both combat engineer units are hors de combat and will sit in rest mode, perhaps for the remainder of the battle depending on how quickly they recover squads. Given the casualties on the first day we do not even outnumber the defenders, so the effective naval and aerial bombardments are making the difference. AV is 83, 80of that in the USA 102nd IR.

The troops at Amami Oshima are ready for an attack but will wait another day to get disruption as low as possible. AV is 981.

The Takao invasion will land beginning tonight. One convoy lagged a hex behind, 3 hexes from Takao, but with no shock attack required it will be fine if they land only part of their charges the first day.

China.

Posted: **Tue Apr 19, 2016 6:11 pm**

Malay Peninsula & Sumatra.

Posted: **Tue Apr 19, 2016 6:11 pm**

Java Sea.

Posted: **Tue Apr 19, 2016 6:11 pm**

Philippines.

Posted: **Tue Apr 19, 2016 6:12 pm**

Okinawa.

Posted: **Tue Apr 19, 2016 6:13 pm**

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: witpqs

I've looked at ranges from Hokkaido to the rest of the HI, and I would like better bases closer the opposite end of HI from Hokkaido.

Okinawa can hit the rest from that side, or China, or Korea if you go there. No need for Honshu/Kyushu is all I mean.
But Shikoku can be a nice little enclave - three bases, limited access by land. Close to Hiroshima, Osaka and Nagoya. Great place to put bombers with shorter range,

Worth considering.

Matrix Games Forums

Rumble in the Southwest witpqs-A vs Andav-J 2011-11-29 to 2017-02-08

RE: 1944 December 17

RE: 1944 December 17

RE: 1944 December 17

RE: 1944 December 17

RE: 1944 December 17

RE: 1944 December 18

RE: 1944 December 17

RE: 1944 December 17

RE: 1944 December 18

RE: 1944 December 18

RE: 1944 December 18

RE: 1944 December 18

RE: 1944 December 18

RE: 1944 December 18

1944 December 19

RE: 1944 December 19

RE: 1944 December 19

RE: 1944 December 19

RE: 1944 December 19

RE: 1944 December 18