Quisling! An AFB does Japan (No PanzerKat)

[John B.]

Check out post No. 52. It went swimmingly and I"ve renamed it "Bif1961" field in your honor.

[Bif1961]

I am honored but you and your digital forces did all the heavy lifting. It is always important to watch for the forts to lower and supply to go (-), that would be a good occasion to bomb, rest and then shock attack them.

[Aurorus]

How goes the war?

[John B.]

time for a quick update.

1. I think Yamshita is dead! [:(] His army HQ was on a transport at Seoribaja and one dutch bomber came in and put one bomb into it. It docked and partially unloaded before it sank,but since then I have been unable to find him. Japan has other good leaders but that is still a blow.

2. China. Many they have endless troops. But, I have a huge concentration and just took Sian when he had to run away due to supply problems. Now, do I go across the river with everything? I suspect so but it will be a very bloody river crossing! In South China there is just some general bashing.

3. Java. I took Soerebja but started to leave too soon so I had to unload everyone and go after the Dutch troops that were still remaining so that has slowed things down by a week or so.

4. Burma. The stalemate is just about two turns away from being broken. I, finally, have a real Japanese division at Rangoon and should be able to push the Burmese division out with ease. The rest of Burma will just be mopping up but I have no designs on India.

5. Philippines. Since he is holed up on Bataan I"m not bombarding as the shore defense batteries out range me and kill 7-8 squads per turn. I'm bombing him every day but otherwise he's not using up too many supplies.

6. So. Pac. I have not done too much here. My troops are still at Morseby but I don't intend to push there.

7. Production. I figured out how to get more oil to the HI. turn off the refineries at Palembang, stock up on the oil, and then turn the refineries back on. I have lots of extra zeros but I'm not sure what good they'll do me.

[Aurorus]

You are wise not to engage in an artillery duel at Bataan. The only way that this works for Japan is if you have every piece of heavy artillery in the Japanese army there.

Contrary to most Japanese players, I think taking the whole of China is a massive waste of precious supply. How far to go? I don't know. I think it depends on many things. If you have isolated and destroyed numerous Chinese units, I think that is sufficient. Yes, they respawn, but only at 1/3 strength, so if you have wiped out a large number of units, the Chinese will never really have sufficient strength to push you back, without British, Indian, or U.S. reinforcements. If you have mostly disabled and destroyed squads, but not units, you should press on a bit to further weaken the Chinese army, in my opinion. It is a time-consuming project to rebuild the Chinese army after Burma falls. You want to make it as time-consuming as possible without dumping half of Honshu's supply into China every month. That is my opinion on China. Basically dumping 1.5 million supply into a siege on Chungking is just flushing supply down the toilet.

Do you intend to do some strat bombing in Australia?

[John B.]

THere is too much heavy artillery in China to move it down to Bataan. I just figure that it's going to take longer to dig Scott out of there. But, it does give my idas something to bomb.

Speaking of bombing, my betties and nells flying torpedo runs out of Rabual have been awful. Just awful. In three days they put one torpedo into on CL when there were three TFs idling at Morseby and that was on the two attacks per day plan. Blah!

I would like to get down to Australia but right now it seems as if I'm a bit slowed down with too much going on. ONce I clear out Java I can start to plan Australia.

I think I can rack up a number of VP by pushing on the Chinese. Remember that Chunking is worth 4 fully loaded aircraft carriers VP wise.

[Aurorus]

ORIGINAL: John B.


I think I can rack up a number of VP by pushing on the Chinese. Remember that Chunking is worth 4 fully loaded aircraft carriers VP wise.

That's the usual Japanese play. The only thing that I point out is how many VPs could those supply gain or prevent the allies from gaining in other theaters? Chungking is a nice prize, but the cost in terms of supply is equivalent to a full-on invasion of India or Australia (which could net supply).

Keep this math in mind when calculating VPs.

VPs for Ground Units Destroyed:

»» Philippine and Chinese: 1 VP for every 12 items destroyed
»» Soviet: 1 VP for every 6 items destroyed
»» All Other Allied: 1 VP for every 3 items destroyed


You have to destroy 4 times as many Chinese units to get the same VPs as destroying other allied units: even Indian units. I am not saying that you should invade India, I merely observe that there is a tradeoff for focusing much effort on China.

[Aurorus]

My point is this; if one reads the more recent AARs, the usual stuff is not working for Japan. Japanese players are losing every game and doing so decisively: regardless of quality of opponent, etc... . The exception is Mr. Kane whose approach relies heavily upon Japan's ability to modify their production so as to produce more second generation fighters than the allies in a PDU:on game.

Japanese strategies have ranged from very conservative to highly aggressive moves into India, Australia, even Pearl Harbor and North America. The results are the same: decisive allied victory. The only constant in these Japanese strategies has been to go all-in on China. My question then is, if every Japanese player, with the exception of Mr. Kane is losing, and every Japanese player is committed to going all-in on China, is it not time to rethink the all-in on China strategy?

[John B.]

Sorry for the delay in posting but, while we've been doing turns not much has been happening. Overall, I'd give myself a solid "Meh". I'm still cleaning up Java and Burma (Rangoon and Magwe have now fallen) and have run into the traditional wall of Chinese units. I'm most disappointed in my air force. A total of more than 200 sorties by betties and nells flying out of Rabual over the past month (with torpedoes) has netted one (yes one) hit. I also put surface TFs into Horn island on three different occasions, once even in shore bombardment mode, while an allied TF was there unloading and did not intercept them. Off the coast of Sumatra a surface TF of two CAs, a CL, and a DD fought 6 rounds with a British DD and got within 6,000 yards and did not score a single hit. I get the feeling that time is slipping away on me.

But, I am getting ready for my Australia invasion. Once Java is cleared I'll have at least three divisions and supporting troops ready to go plus the KB. I think I can cut off Perth by getting airborne in to Kilgorie ASAP and then wipe out lots of nice juicy Aussies. I don't think I can hold Perth for the duration of the war but it is far away from the US.

@Aurorus, I hear you on China and I know that you need to kill them at better than 2-1 to make headway but they are so easy to kill most of the time. Of course, my last assault disproved that theory. I dont want to push into India and I don't think I can take Australia so all I can do is try to kill as much as possible and buckle down.

[John B.]

Total Japanese newbie question. What does it mean when the research aircraft are highlighted in blue?

[John B.]

Here is a good example of why it's "meh" game for me. I've done this attack twice. I have almost as many troops, more (and much heavier guns) and tanks. Scott's Chinese have been chased up here bombed and shelled yet twice I've come in at 1-5 and taken very heavy losses. He's about to escape across a river but if I can't kill him here it basically slams the door on China. I'm not listed as anything subtracting from me and he's short on supplies but still kills lots and lots of my troops.

[Bif1961]

He is minus supply but plus terrain, probably x3, which is a huge bonus. Your base AV is also lower than his so it doesn't look like you could defeat him here given all those circumstances. Once he moves across the river you can take at least half on the troops you have in the hex and use them else where maybe to make a break through using the railroads to move quickly.

[Aurorus]

ORIGINAL: John B.

Total Japanese newbie question. What does it mean when the research aircraft are highlighted in blue?

It is March and that aircraft will be available soon. Notice the number next to the name of the airframe (in this case 44). That number is the percent progress on that airframe. When the number reaches 100, the Helen 1a will go into production. When the airframe is in blue, that is the point at which you can change it to the next model in the R&D line without losing the factories. When you next open a turn, save your game. Then experiment with changing the Helen Ia to the next model to get the gist. So long as the plane is listed in blue and the percent progress does not reach 100, you can change the factory to R&D the next model. Once the number reaches 100%, the factories will shift from R&D to production, if upgrade is set to "yes," which it is in this case. Once the factories begin production, you will not be able to convert them back to R&D. It is a good idea to set upgrade to "no" for all of the factories that you wish to use for R&D on the next model in the line.

BTW, your A6M2-Rufe factories should also be blue at this point. If you put some factories into the Rufe, you can now upgrade them to research the A6M3a without damage to any.

[Aurorus]

The problem with trying to use China as a primary center for VP accumulation is the supply cost per VP gained. That is the point that I am making. In a full-scale offensive in China with large numbers engaged over extended periods, either in big stacks or at numerous points along a line, you will have to ship approximately 1K to 1.5K supply per day into China from Honshu. Limiting China to native supplies only, those produced in Korea and China, will still give you enough for some limited actions in China and free up approximately 1/2 million supply through 1942 for other theaters.

How does this relate to VPs? To illustrate the point in a grossly oversimplified manner. Flying 3 fighters on CAP uses 1 supply point. If those 3 fighters shoot down an allied level bomber, that is a 1 supply point for 2 VP. You could never hope to achieve anything like that in China. In order to achieve auto-victory, let us say on January 1, 1944, you will have to accumlate 3 to 1 VPs to the allies. So, for the purposes of auto-victory, actually you must destroy 6 times as many devices in China as you lose. If you destroy Australian units, however, you need only destroy 1.5 times as many devices as you lose (since 3 Australian devices count for 1 VP and 6 Japanese devices count for 1 VP). The supply cost for attacking Australian units and Chinese units is of course the same.

From a strategic perspective, I think China is less important than most Japanese players believe. Supply flowing into China is limited by the supply capacity of the bases in Burma, which is further limited by any allied units drawing supply from these bases and by the Monsoon season. Moreover, the supply path is rather long, so what surplus of the limited supply that draws from Burma bases will be further reduced. The real trick is to keep the allies either out of Burma for as long as possible, or drawing supply from the limited capacity Burma bases for as long as possible. Once the allies are able to draw supply from Rangoon and the port bases in Thailand, however, the gig is up, supply will begin to move into China in some quantity, and the Chinese army will begin to "awake." Until this point in time, (until Rangoon falls), strategic bombing from China should be a frustrating proposition for the allies. If the allies do decide to strategically bomb from Chungking, the will use the supply needed to "wake up" the Chinese army.

Hence, from a strategic point-of-view, China is completely useless to the allies so long as Burma is yours or the allies have a large army drawing supply from bases in Burma. After this point in time, the allies must make a decision: either strategically bomb from Chungking or rebuild the Chinese army to start an offensive. They will probably not be able to do both effectively. The allies have nearly unlimited access to supply everywhere on the map, except China. That is why China is not as strategically important as most Japanese players believe, in my opinion.

[John B.]

Thanks for all of the input! What I may do is, once he crosses the river split off the artillery and head north. No more rivers to cross and if he stands and defends I can kill squads through bombardment. I'll also change the factories to start the next leg of R&D. Might as well keep pushing that as quickly as I can since, as I recall, the other factories automatically upgrade to the new model once it comes on line. I also may head into China from Burma just to see how much he has defending there.

I'll think about what you say for China. At the very least it's a place to keep attacking in 1943-44 when the rest of the map is depressing.

Here's a thought I was toying with. Is it really worth it to build the Yamato and the Mushashi. They will give the allies 300+ VP when they sink, but will they sink 300+ VP each before they go down? If they don't get built they don't get sunk and that's VP the allies won't be able to score. Are the super battleships worth it?

[Aurorus]

ORIGINAL: John B.

Thanks for all of the input! What I may do is, once he crosses the river split off the artillery and head north. No more rivers to cross and if he stands and defends I can kill squads through bombardment. I'll also change the factories to start the next leg of R&D. Might as well keep pushing that as quickly as I can since, as I recall, the other factories automatically upgrade to the new model once it comes on line. I also may head into China from Burma just to see how much he has defending there.

I'll think about what you say for China. At the very least it's a place to keep attacking in 1943-44 when the rest of the map is depressing.

Here's a thought I was toying with. Is it really worth it to build the Yamato and the Mushashi. They will give the allies 300+ VP when they sink, but will they sink 300+ VP each before they go down? If they don't get built they don't get sunk and that's VP the allies won't be able to score. Are the super battleships worth it?

In my opinion, they are worth building, but not until late in the war. They use far too much fuel to be used regularly throughout the war. Typically for ships, I convert some of the merchant yards to naval yards and try to accelerate all of the 1944 CVs and some of the CVEs. I turn off most merchant ship production for everything except for the CVES, oilers, the bigger tankers, and the couple of Tosu 1-point ships that can convert to ACMs.

I turn off production on the Yamato and Mushashi to start while the 1944 CVs are acclerating. Then in mid 1942, I turn production back on for the Musashi until its arrival date is approximately equal to that of the Yamato. By early 1943, both ships should need about 3-4 more months of work to complete. I then shut it off work until late 1943 on both. If you go back to work on the 2 ships in late 1943 or early 1944, you will have them in early-mid 1944. At this point, you do not need to sink 300 VPs with them to get value. You will be trying to hang on and prevent auto-victory, so you only need to get 100 VPs out of them to prevent allied auto-victory in 1944. You can see, by reading AARs, that allied CVs and well-covered amphibious groups are virtually unassailable by air in 1944. SCTFs are you best hope to counter invasions, and Yamato and Musashi may be of great benefit to you at this point.

[John B.]

That fits with my experience as the allies. Once the flood of CVEs and CVs come in the Japanese can lose 1000+ planes for a few hits on a carrier and, with allied damage control it's hard to sink one. That's an interesting thought about turning off the merchant ship yards. All those extra ships are, again, just free VP for the allied subs to sink.

[John B.]

Hello all,

We're heading into the second half of March 1942 and things are starting to pick up again. I still have a nice VP lead but that's only to be expected. I have not sunk as many ships, but I've wracked up some nice VP as Scott stood and defended Burma so there are more VP there. My operational air losses are starting to creep up but I still have a good lead in planes shot down mainly b/c of some good attrition rates of P-40Es over Moresby.

[John B.]

Here is the current situation in China. Scott has a HUGE army behind the river but my plan is to ignore that for now. I'm going to screen it and head up the mountains to Lanchow. I figure he has no river to hide behind on the way there so if he wants to stand I'll batter him with artillery and if he runs away I take Lanchow. One point to Aurous's excellent analysis of VP's available in China is that any city one takes from the Chinese is worth 10 VP per upgrade point. So, the little dot cities, you take in the opening days can (if I am doing this right) be build up to be worth 80 VP with a level 8 airbase. That's more than a CA. Lanchow is worth 50 VP so it can be built up to being worth a CV. Good points that are hard for the allies to retake that can balance off losses elsewhere. At lease IMHO.

But, that huge army can always come out spoiling for a fight.

[John B.]

Here is the situation in Bruma. I just invaded Port Blair which I view as a significant position and will likely take it this turn. I've got to IJA divions there that are now mopping up but I"ll have to move in more at some point since there is a whole army in India that has nothing to do. My only plan after liberating the Burmese is to push into the back door of China to see if Scott has stripped out its defenses.