Starvation Island--Scenario 4 "Learning Curve"

[kfmiller41]

I can definitely agree with 5, as Japan in the campaign supply, fuel, repairs all take serious thinking ahead of time or your operations will bog down[&o]. Shouldn't be a problem for you as your a quick learner. Trying to invade into India while making sure you have enough fuel and supply there and at home to keep the lights on is tough. The biggest thing I have found though is recon and search, if you don't cover your areas with search (and sometimes even if you do) carrier groups can sneak in and really make you sorry[:D]. Makes if fun though. Reading your AAR makes me want to get into that 2x2 game against you[X(]

[John 3rd]

You are more then welcome to join into the 2x2.  It would be a blast!  At this point Michael and I are still looking for a worthy and reliable pair of opponents.  A 2x2 has an advantage to being a slower game since it has to be handed off between the players so the time commitment isn't very much at all.

We haven't decided what to play yet either.  Michael is leaning towards Juan's Mod that is CV-enhanced but it needs to be a 'team' decision between the four of us.  I'm not sure and we are talking about options.  Since I've been playing some with the Editor we could also create a small-scale Mod with a slightly different opening placement of forces (as a thought).  Read the General Forum Thread that Canoerebel started about alternate openings/uncertanty into the game.

Is anyone interested in playing against Michael and I?  I can tell you this much as a team, we will not have separate sphere's of influence.  I expect us to work through our strategy and then coordinate throughout the war as a pair. He tends to balance my aggressiveness (which is good) and be a 'voice of reality' when I am thinking about invading California or Great Britain...

EDIT: I brought the Uncertainty Thread up to the Front Page.

[Fishbed]

Honestly, I wouldn't hate a 2x2 as a first ever campaign game, especially if I play the Allied side...

[John 3rd]

Thank you Sir.  I've asked Michael to jump onto the AAR to contribute to the discussion.
 

[Fishbed]

You're most welcome, my pleasure Sir [:)]

(playing ANZAC, UK & DEI would be great for a first time I guess!)

[Fishbed]

oops, bad topic. Please disregard!

[John 3rd]

While we await Mr. Michael's commentary on the above conversation let me sum up the events of September 11, 1942.

Intelligence confirms the sinking of the USS Wasp!

IJN SS I-7 and I-15 make three separate attacks upon American units with no success. The best moment was I-7 trying to hit its second American CV in 3 days when it MISSED Hornet with 2 TTs. DRAT!

SS Wahoo (NW Rabaul) gets hit by several DC

CARDIV1 wreaks havoc SE of Guadalcanal! Numerous strikes are flown and for a cost of 3 Zero, 1 Kate, and 5 Val (3 Ops) the Sea Eagles sink an SC and 2 AM while damaging 2 DD, 2 AM, 2 AP, and 3 xAP. The APs all had troops on them. Several should sink. Hope to keep up the carnage tomorrow.

A Raid of 16 F4F and 9 B-17 appears over CARDIV5 and the CAP tears the Wildcats apart. For no losses they shoot down 7 F4F and damage several of the big bombers. No damage to Jap CVs.

In another exercise in AI stupidity, the Yamato TF was ordered to bombard Henderson. It did---DURING THE DAYLIGHT! Uggg... No problem but rather frightening to think about. This TF sitting around in daylight crap is NOT a good thing!

[Fishbed]

Whatever the scenario, i'd be glad to experiment some original or new HR Ive seen in certain games in order to balance the game. Things such as, for instance (while playing hopefully myself CW forces):

- No night bombing against a base or a ground unit under a certain % of moonlight (although seeing how uber it is right now I'd cancel it completely)
- Rules about the Monsoon season (which would bring us to a truce in jungle hex and no offensive air ops for a number of months) in the SEAC theater.
- Need to pay PPs to move units out of India into Burma (and the usual PPs rules for Chinese and Mandchukuo units)
- Rules for the Chinese theater?

[FatR]

To bombard at night, you need to set your bombardment TF on "mission speed" and "retirement allowed". Then it will time its approach to minimize the air threat.

[ny59giants]

As I awake to read my e-mails and see if I can get my last 2 CVs back to "relative" safety, I see that John has invited me to read his AAR. This small scenario has been a learning experience for me (along with my game vs FatR). There are still habits and ways of thinking from WITP that have continued to cause me grief here (and there [:D]).

My decision to use all 4 CVs to reinforce Lunga were well thought out, IMO. I kept the CVs "just" outside of extended Zero range (15 hexes), but I sent my 2 BB based SC TF in to over the transports at Lunga (another BF, SB, and Cav Rgt landed). The mid-ocean intercept has not happened often enough in my campaign game to prepare for the surface action that happened. This was a game to help John learn some of the issues that we have to face in AE vs WITP.

I don't think there could be a more stable partnership that John and I. It started out as me becoming his "Economics Minister" in his game vs Canoerebel (Dan) as Tracker was just coming out as a new utility (I don't think I would try to run Japan's economy without it). Eventually, I offered my phone number to him to help my "computer challenged" friend [;)] get Tracker installed and running. I also added in my "professional counseling" as a side benefit while he was going through his legal issues. I would say we talk on the phone about 3 times per week (yesterday was the last). I hope to take a trip to Colorado by late spring (too many years in GA, SC , and now Tenn to face that much snow [;)]).

I have thrown out the idea of playing JuanG's CV Enhanced mod as a 2x2 PBEM (or just me vs him if no opponents found). I am enjoying my current JuanG mod (BB Enhanced) vs FatR (Stanislav). I have not asked Juan to do so, but I would like to have a third party help make some pre-game changes in force dispositions at start using the Editor. It would be more in line with WITPs first turn move bonus that I liked of moving troops forward to large bases (Kwajalein, Truk, Babeldoab, etc.). The Allies could have a CV TF based somewhere around southern Australia for example (maybe with a few BBs from Pearl in their own TF). Again, adding in some uncertainty to the games start. Of course John gets to run around with KB, but I will have negotiated to have control over Mini-KB (along with the land war in China which he hates [:D]).

So any volunteers or two out there??

[Barb]

Notes for John 3rd:
1. Actually using each carrier in its own TF to limit loses isnt working anymore - Planes will try to hit anything they could find in the whole hex.
2. Attacks agains shipping are influenced by weather - clear weather and you will probably get hits. But striking with full cloud cover will made simple targets of your bombers as they will not hit anything. Watch the weather!

[John 3rd]

Glad Michael jumped in. 
 
I'm open to whatever we want to do as a group of four players.  If this means an Mod like the one described by Michael--Cool.  We could look at assigning higher VP numbers to distant bases for the Japanese to keep and HOLD as chatted about in Canoerebel's Thread.  Could also do some reassignment of Units moving about (like an Aussie Brigade and/or an American RCT or two heading for the SE Pacific.  Perhaps a small redeployment as Warships?  What moving a BB Division to Manila?  That would be...different...
 
Does anyone have any thoughts that could then be in a Mod that you might like to play?
 
Open to ideas/suggestions.
 

[John 3rd]

ORIGINAL: FatR

To bombard at night, you need to set your bombardment TF on "mission speed" and "retirement allowed". Then it will time its approach to minimize the air threat.

Will try this and other suggestions!

[John 3rd]

I decided to keep the learning curve going after Wasp got sunk by swing CARDIV5 closer to Luganville in an attempt to pick off more shipping.  Knowing that I might be attacked by LBA I raised my CAP from 30% to my old total of 60% I ran in WitP.  BAD idea!  I had two strikes go into LUganville of about a dozen Zeros escorting 30-40 bombers.  They were met by 12 F4F and 12 P-400.  My Zeros did well but the Allied Fighters broke through the escorts and chewed up my valuable Vals and Kates.  Lost about a dozen of each.  YIKES!  [X(] 
 
Lesson learned as to making sure there are enough Fighters to fly as Escorts.  Mike and I spoke about it this morning and I REALLY like this because Allied and Japanese commanders in 1942 really struggled with the proper balance in flying off Strike Packages while still protecting the CVs.  It is a great conundrum.
 

[Q-Ball]

Your observations are correct, and I think one of the biggest changes in AE is that the fleet is more important than it was in WITP.

Land-Based air in general is less-deadly to shipping. Torpedo supplies are limited, it's harder to get hits, and attack planes are still quite vulnerable. Add to that Allied bombers need to be specifically trained for NavB or they won't hit squat. Couple that with airbase stacking limits, greater need to AV support, and you have a mix that means LBA is less effective.

That all makes the fleet, both CV arms and surface ships, more effective. Surface units especially are more important in AE than WITP. That's my take.

In WITP, LBA ruled. In AE, it's the NAVY, as it should be.

[ny59giants]

Per Juan's latest posting that I requested is the basic CVs for both side at start and through 42 in CV Enhanced mod that he is working on.

JAPANESE CARRIER OOB 41/42

2 x CV Amagi Class - Available Dec '41
36,000tons / 31 knots / 84 aircraft

2 x CV Shokaku Class - Available Dec '41
23,000tons / 32 knots / 81 aircraft

2 x CV Soryu Class - Available Dec '41
27,500tons / 33 knots / 90 aircraft

2 x CV Hiryu Class - Available Dec '41
27,500tons / 33 knots / 90 aircraft

2 x CV Junyo Class - Commissioned Mid '42
29,500tons / 33 knots / 96 aircraft

1 x CV Taiho Class - Commissioned Late '42
32,500tons / 32 knots / 75 aircraft

In addition, there are 2 CVLs;
1 Ryujo CVL / 15,000tons / 29 knots / 36 aircraft
1 Shinyo CVL / 16,500tons / 31 knots / 42 aircraft
Plus another 2 due to arrive through '42;
2 Junho CVL / 23,500tons / 30 knots / 60 aircraft

There is also 1 CVE;
1 Hosho CVE / 7,500tons / 25 knots / 18 aircraft
Plus another 2 due to arrive through '42;
2 Unyo CVE / 14,000tons / 23 knots / 27 aircraft

There are also conversions possibilties, which could amount to up to 6 more CVLs (~40 a/c) and 8 more CVEs (~25 a/c). I strongly recommend using a house rule to limit the number and availabilty of conversions.


UNITED STATES NAVY CARRIER OOB 41/42

2 x CV Lexington Class - Available Dec '41
37,500tons / 33 knots / 92 aircraft

2 x CV Wasp Class - 1 Available Dec '41 (1 stationed in the Atlantic - Arrives Mid '42)
16,500tons / 32 knots / 72 aircraft

3 x CV Yorktown Class - 1 Available Dec '41 (2 stationed in the Atlantic - 1 Arrives Early '42)
21,000tons / 32 knots / 86 aircraft

4 x CV Essex Class - 1 Available Dec '41 (3 Commisioned through '42)
27,500tons / 33 knots / 90 aircraft

The USN gets the following CVLs in late '42;
2 Independance CVL / 10,500tons / 31 knots / 30 aircraft (Cleveland conversion)

In addition, the USN begins with 1 CVE;
1 Langley CVE / 12,500tons / 16 knots / 28 aircraft
The USN also gets the following CVEs through '42;
1 Long Island CVE / 12,000tons / 16 knots / 16 aircraft
4 Sangamon CVE / 10,500tons / 18 knots / 31 aircraft
5 Bogue CVE / 9,500tons / 16 knots / 28 aircraft

The USN also has the opportunity to add via conversion a further 3 CVs (2 Lexington, 1 Iowa), 13 CVL (7 Omaha, 2 Wichita, 4 Cleveland) and several CVE.

SUMMARY
The situation in the pacific assuming no losses or conversions at Dec '41 and Dec '42 for the various navies is;
IJN 8 CV / 2 CVL / 1 CVE -> 11 CV / 4 CVL / 3 CVE
USN 5 CV / 0 CVL / 1 CVE -> 10 CV / 2 CVL / 11 CVE

'43 is when the party starts for the USN.

In this small scenario, the fact mentioned by others of how pilot experience differences influences combat results is very noticeable. My non-fighters can hit land target only with any degree of accuracy. The LB NavB is poor and even with some LBA on 100% training, this is an issue. Use of B-17s is OK, but they cannot go more than a few turns before they need R&R as many have become disabled. Lack of high enough detection levels has rendered some of John's bombardment of Lunga and now Lunganville not too effective.

[kfmiller41]

Well I hardly consider myself worthy[:D] compared to some on these forums, but as the allied side I at least feel like I can make a comeback from disaster which usually happens[8|] If fishbed is willing I suppose I can be talked into a good war for freedom. Might be a problem with locations though as I am east coast US.

You know I am going to regret this in the end, as giants is an economic guru[&o] and he can keep the suicide attacker (John) supplied so he can do that banzai thing that he does so well.

[ny59giants]

It looks like we are at least 3 out of 4 players to a 2x2 PBEM.  Just need Fishbed to make a decision (insert Jeopardy theme music here).

I would like to wait on the CV Enhanced mod coming out and take a closer look under the hood before jumping in (if this happens). I still need to teach my young samurai a few more lessons before we begin (actually, he is teaching me a few lessons in this game, but don't tell him that now....his EGO [really is the ID, but I'm not going to go Freud on everybody] is large enough already [:D]).

[Fishbed]

Well seems sexy to be, that's a CV feast we've got here...

If I play CW I'll be the underdog, using mostly LB forces. I like that ^^
But about the homerules...? Or shall we discuss this later?

but Im technically ok with the game [:)]

[n01487477]

ORIGINAL: miller41
...

You know I am going to regret this in the end, as giants is an economic guru[&o]
...

Yeah but he stood on the shoulders of midgets to get there though [:D][8D]