Manila or Pearl-new paradigm?

[Sardaukar]

Using both KB and Baby KB around PI/DEI from start has it's merits. You will have to call off Wake landing, but there is nothing really strategically important in CentPac during that time for IJN anyway. If Allies want to challenge IJN in CentPac during early 42, they'd be foolish.

As Japanese, you need to secure the most important area of advance fast. This means PI and DEI. By preventing most if not all shipping around this area, you can be very aggressive and prevent Allies having any real hope of defence. For example, you can definitely prevent "Fortress Java"-strategy, which is still available for Allies in AE. That strategy would require evacuating AUS brigades from Singapore to Java and redirecting Rangoon reinforcements there. This would give Allies approx. 3 divisions worth of extra troops there...which would be very difficult to dislodge, 18th UK Div and brigades from 8th AUS being about best troops Allies have. They could and would be augmented with 46th Indian Brigage (low exp mediocre but lot of replacement available) and 48 Gurkha Brigade (very good unit too). This could basically lead to crumbling of Japanese war economy, since all DEI would be within heavy bomber range from Java later.

So, for Japanese, they need to move early and aggressively to PI, DEI and Rabaul, to secure southern flank, inflicting maximum ground losses to Allies and most importantly, enabling their war economy.

In this light, I myself would see PH attack very secondary. Those old battle-wagons in PH will not get that dangerous until USN can achieve carrier parity. That is not going to happen in early 1942.

[vlcz]

ORIGINAL: bklooste
How mamy planes did the british lose at Tarantino ?  And they were already at war ! 

As you most sure doesn´t refer to plane losses in "inglorious bastard" filmaking, surely you mean Taranto [;)]

"....Of the two aircraft lost, two crew members of the first plane were taken prisoner, and the other two were lost..."

[Wirraway_Ace]

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Nicely said Zace.

I too really believe that the Commanders in Luzon---read Dugout Doug--would have been caught flat-footed from a Port Strike.  The Commander of the Asiatic Fleet was very competent but even he didn't react quickly.  The Japanese crushed Clark in the afternoon when the Americans had had well over 8 hours warning.  The Japanese strikes came in over land along a route predicted and they achieved surprise. 

Oddly enough, the reason the Japanese were so successful in the PI was that they DIDN'T show up when they planned to..., the weather in Formosa had them "socked in" all morning when the Americans were up looking for an attack. It cleared up just in time to let them catch the US on the ground re-fueling and preparing it's own strike. Blind stupid luck, good or bad, depending on your point of view.

I'm not defending MacArthur..., the man was a first-class jack-ass (along with Bereton, his air commander). But the Japanese not only benefited from good planning in their opening moves..., they also had a world-class run of "good luck" in everything they tried. Which turned against them about the first of May, and "crapped out" entirely in early June.

Very true. However, I was still surprised how long it took the Asiatic Fleet to put is subs to sea and evac other key ships. A few Commanders (or their execs who where sober) did take their subs out and submerge according to Blair, but most still appeared to be tied to their tenders when dawn, 8 Dec, arrived. This is why I allow 2 port attacks on Day 1. My only restriction, is the KB can't be used West of Manila. I think it could have approached Manila from the Pacific and maintained surprise, but sailing through the South China Sea was not an option for surprise.

As far as the Brits being better led at Singapore, I would argue that about the only leaders who did as badly (or worse) than the MacArthur and his staff over the first few weeks of the war were those the Empire had sent to Singapore. The RAF and RN greatly underestimated the operation range of the Japanese bombers and I suspect a reasonable degree of surprise could have been achieved with early morning port strike on Singapore. Given that the RAF had no first line fighters in the Far East (the Philippines had the Allies only modern fighters in the theater), and very few functional radar sets, Force Z might never have got to sea...

[John 3rd]

There were NOT very many good leaders for the Brits in Malaya.  Quite true.
 

[Wirraway_Ace]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

Using both KB and Baby KB around PI/DEI from start has it's merits. You will have to call off Wake landing, but there is nothing really strategically important in CentPac during that time for IJN anyway. If Allies want to challenge IJN in CentPac during early 42, they'd be foolish.

As Japanese, you need to secure the most important area of advance fast. This means PI and DEI. By preventing most if not all shipping around this area, you can be very aggressive and prevent Allies having any real hope of defence. For example, you can definitely prevent "Fortress Java"-strategy, which is still available for Allies in AE. That strategy would require evacuating AUS brigades from Singapore to Java and redirecting Rangoon reinforcements there. This would give Allies approx. 3 divisions worth of extra troops there...which would be very difficult to dislodge, 18th UK Div and brigades from 8th AUS being about best troops Allies have. They could and would be augmented with 46th Indian Brigage (low exp mediocre but lot of replacement available) and 48 Gurkha Brigade (very good unit too). This could basically lead to crumbling of Japanese war economy, since all DEI would be within heavy bomber range from Java later.

So, for Japanese, they need to move early and aggressively to PI, DEI and Rabaul, to secure southern flank, inflicting maximum ground losses to Allies and most importantly, enabling their war economy.

In this light, I myself would see PH attack very secondary. Those old battle-wagons in PH will not get that dangerous until USN can achieve carrier parity. That is not going to happen in early 1942.

I find Sardaukar's arguement for focusing on the DEI more compelling than those who argue for destroying the Asiatic Fleet.
My opinion: The Asiatic Fleet assets based at Manila do not represent a strategic target. The USN gets S-boat replacements, for what they are worth, in time to use them in SOPAC and SWPAC. The older fleet boats at Manila are meaningless in the short term and long term. There are very few good commanders that might be lost with their ships. In the game, the loss of the tenders is not particularily important (though IRL, the loss of the torps and skilled techs was a big deal). None of the other shipping matters to the Allied war effort in the short or long term. All key assets (Naval base forces) can be evaced by PBY.

For those who don't think CENPAC is very important, remember that if it hadn't been for MacArthur, and the nearly unlimited assets available the the US in 1944, all efforts would have been focused on the "shortest route to Japan". As it was, the endgame was still played out along the islands of the CENPAC axis of advance. Any Japanese strategy that is DEI focused also needs to be able to avoid the Americans from early establishment of bases in the Marshalls.

[Q-Ball]

I agree with the maximum focus on the DEI, but I don't think you need KB for that. A Max DEI focus means committing almost all available ground troops, most of your IJN Air assets, and most of the IJN Surface ships, including BBs and cruisers. Baby KB can provide air support for invasion fleets.

What will KB do to speed up the DEI, bomb land bases? This is a waste of a strategic asset.

I personally think SPLITTING KB is wise in the first month. This is the only time in the game I would split KB. 4 IJN CVs are still more than enough to take on the USN CVs, as you only have 3 in the first month (and even those 3 don't have enough Wildcats to go around).

Take the other 2 CVs, PLUS Baby KB, and commit to DEI.

The other 4 CVs can still cover landings at Rabaul, Port Moresby.

The old BBs are not useless: Far from it. Surface warships are important in AE. That's why taking them off the board early is important, whether they are sunk or not.

[John 3rd]

Qball--You and I have similar views of things when it comes to operating the KB!  Using 4 CVs to hit PH and then cause chaos in the Pacific is enough for the first couple of months.  After that, however, one needs to be a bit more careful.
 
 

[Wirraway_Ace]

I have not yet (500 turns or so) been able to get my USN dive bombers to be able to hit a moving warship (with one very small exception).  They can hit unloading transports and even a moving transport, but not a CV or BB.  From my experience to date, you could split the KB 4 ways in the first few months of the war, and I would be hesitant as the Allies to offer battle.

[crsutton]

I would rather lose six old BBs over 20 subs. Lousy torps or not the subs are too important.
 
However, I only play historical first turn.

[Q-Ball]

ORIGINAL: crsutton

I would rather lose six old BBs over 20 subs. Lousy torps or not the subs are too important.

However, I only play historical first turn.

The difference is that damaged Subs are repaired quickly, whereas BBs are not. A Manila strike does nothing for Japan in 1942; damaged subs will repair quickly, and their poor torps stink anyway. A PH strike will take BBs off the board for months, even if you don't sink them.

[koontz]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

The difference is that damaged Subs are repaired quickly, whereas BBs are not. A Manila strike does nothing for Japan in 1942; damaged subs will repair quickly, and their poor torps stink anyway. A PH strike will take BBs off the board for months, even if you don't sink them.

Well If u use KB (or parts of it)
Not many subs survives.

Also was thinking of the HR that restricts IJN to the nr of port strikes.
Think it should be unlimited portstrikes in that timezone. so if someone strikes at Manilla they should be allowed to also strike at i.e Hongkong.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

ORIGINAL: crsutton

I would rather lose six old BBs over 20 subs. Lousy torps or not the subs are too important.

However, I only play historical first turn.

The difference is that damaged Subs are repaired quickly, whereas BBs are not. A Manila strike does nothing for Japan in 1942; damaged subs will repair quickly, and their poor torps stink anyway. A PH strike will take BBs off the board for months, even if you don't sink them.

A properly executed (read: overkill) Manila strike will kill 20-25 subs and ancillary support vessels. KILL, not damage.

[AW1Steve]

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

ORIGINAL: crsutton

I would rather lose six old BBs over 20 subs. Lousy torps or not the subs are too important.

However, I only play historical first turn.

The difference is that damaged Subs are repaired quickly, whereas BBs are not. A Manila strike does nothing for Japan in 1942; damaged subs will repair quickly, and their poor torps stink anyway. A PH strike will take BBs off the board for months, even if you don't sink them.

A properly executed (read: overkill) Manila strike will kill 20-25 subs and ancillary support vessels. KILL, not damage.

In your dreams CB! [:D] I'm waiting for you! The might Canopus and Black Hawk are waiting to smash your vaunted "KB"![:D]
(This trash talk is referring to a upcoming campaign where CB plans to test his theory against me). [:D]

[Sardaukar]

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

I agree with the maximum focus on the DEI, but I don't think you need KB for that. A Max DEI focus means committing almost all available ground troops, most of your IJN Air assets, and most of the IJN Surface ships, including BBs and cruisers. Baby KB can provide air support for invasion fleets.

What will KB do to speed up the DEI, bomb land bases? This is a waste of a strategic asset.

I personally think SPLITTING KB is wise in the first month. This is the only time in the game I would split KB. 4 IJN CVs are still more than enough to take on the USN CVs, as you only have 3 in the first month (and even those 3 don't have enough Wildcats to go around).

Take the other 2 CVs, PLUS Baby KB, and commit to DEI.

The other 4 CVs can still cover landings at Rabaul, Port Moresby.

The old BBs are not useless: Far from it. Surface warships are important in AE. That's why taking them off the board early is important, whether they are sunk or not.

I would not advocate using carrier air against land bases (apart from ships in ports). IJN planes are like cardboard boxes compared to USN Dauntlesses etc. and even USN planes find it hard going against bases both in game and in history.

What KB (or heavy enough CV presence) could do in PI & DEI is to prevent Allied utilizing Surface Combat TFs and troop transport convoys. Together with Betty/Nell/Kate units, that is enough to completely shut down the area for Allied shipping.

This would mean you could land in DEI lot before Allies have chance to dig in or bring in reinforcements..or evacuate. If you do PH attack, it'll take couple of weeks before IJN can bring full presence to area..time that wise Allied player can use.

Surface warships are important in AE but they are twice as important in DEI. You need to hammer Allied surface assets with LBA ad CV planes to keep his SC TFs off your invasion convoys. During first 2-3 months, those old US BBs are not going to be able to do much and it'd be even beneficial to IJN to encounter them at sea with CV air.

So, KB and other IJN CVs are more useful in "power projection" in area than directly supporting invasions, that is where IJN BB/CA force is needed.

USN can conduct "hit & run" raids as they did in history, but this sort of strategy would speed invasion of DEI. There is absolutely nothing in Cent Pacific that IJN needs to invade apart from Guam and other bases closer to South Pacific. You can always take Wake later, US is not going to be able too defend it, since you can bring whole IJN CV force to Cent/South Pacific in Feb 42 after PI and DEI are secured.

[John 3rd]

Sard--YOu are totally on with those comments.  The use of CVs in the DEI absolutely hastens its collapse.  If you pull a pair of KB CVs plus the 2 CVLs and CVE, the Japanese can create a pair of CTF carrying at least 100-125 planes each and that will wipe the floor of anything in the DEI area.  LOTS of ships going blub-blub...
 

[bklooste]

ORIGINAL: vlcz

ORIGINAL: bklooste
How mamy planes did the british lose at Tarantino ?  And they were already at war ! 

As you most sure doesn´t refer to plane losses in "inglorious bastard" filmaking, surely you mean Taranto [;)]

"....Of the two aircraft lost, two crew members of the first plane were taken prisoner, and the other two were lost..."

yes i just watched the movie when i wrote that

[Djordje]

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace

I have not yet (500 turns or so) been able to get my USN dive bombers to be able to hit a moving warship (with one very small exception).  They can hit unloading transports and even a moving transport, but not a CV or BB.  From my experience to date, you could split the KB 4 ways in the first few months of the war, and I would be hesitant as the Allies to offer battle.

At what altitude do you use your dive bombers? If I recall correctly you should set them to 10-15k. Below that dive bombers don't have time for full dive so they use glide attack (less accurate), above that they would get too much speed and could not pull the nose up so game uses level bombing routine instead, which is far less accurate as well.
There is a thread around with exact altitude ranges.

[AcePylut]

Well I'm still fighting against the Jap invasion of the DEI in my PBEM, and I am ecstatic that my opponent hit Pearl, and not the 27ish subs in Manila - they have really been "effective" as can be. I get at least one or two actual "hits" every turn on ships. It's forced the Japanese to waste valuable fuel and escorts ships on asw missions, instead of escorting fleets.

Had those subs been sunk - the 8 BB's at Pearl would be available now, instead of in a year or so (didn't lose any BB's in 2 days worth of PH strikes - an uncommon result to be sure - but as this PBEM is showing, one that could happen). Had the subs been sunk, things would be much worse for me. There wouldn't be any "do I send the mini-KB through these straights, knowing that the allies have about 10 subs waiting for me" hesitations.

As far as the planes go - by Dec 25th, I had full search arc coverage from a 330degree heading out of Midway, all the way down and around to Oz (but before that happened, my sneaky opponent got the KB down by Sydney). The fighters lost - heck, by the time my pilots are trained enough to "not" die in massive amounts, those squadrons will be stocked. I really view the airplane losses as a wash. I can lose them on Dec 7th, or I can commit them to battle asap and lose them becuase the pilots all suck. It'll take time to train up decent pilots capable of battling the Jap "with a chance", and by then I'll have the planes.

Meh - i'm really leaning towards the Manila strike. Those subs are going to be alot more effective than the BB's are. If each sub sinks just 5 ships a year, that's ~125 ships per year, 500 between '42 and Jan '46. That, imho, is going to have a lot "bigger" effect on the war effort than 8 old, slow, bombardment/bomb magnet BB's will.

[Chickenboy]

Nice. Thanks AcePylut for posting your thoughts.

I was thinking of something else this morning while laying in bed (thinking about AE when I first awake-I'm pathetic I know).

How many of the Allied players have successfully attacked the PH AOs that accompanied KB? I've certainly heard of it being done-sneaking Enterprise over to within striking range of the replenishment TF.

A Manila strike takes THAT off the table too-you don't need to expose your IJN AOs to that sort of surprise attack because you don't need them in theatre. Just a thought.

[John 3rd]

I never bring my AOs with me.  They go to the Kwajalein area or to whatever my rendezvous point will be in 3-4 days.  Hate having those precious things out in the middle of nowhere.