Matrix Games Forums

Oh, you will be hooked. I am. I miss the production too. I find that I really hurt for Corp HQ's. Unless I over load them which I try not to do. And I cannot stomach placing German units under Ally HQ's. LOL

Great looking for some advice. Just cannot figure out how some of these guys go as far as they do as fast as they do.

ORIGINAL: 2ndACR

Oh, you will be hooked. I am. I miss the production too. I find that I really hurt for Corp HQ's. Unless I over load them which I try not to do. And I cannot stomach placing German units under Ally HQ's. LOL

Great looking for some advice. Just cannot figure out how some of these guys go as far as they do as fast as they do.

I'm hooked playing, but I have to say that I enjoy AE AARs a lot more than WITE AARs. Perhaps its just that the style hasn't developed over there as much, but watching a WITE AAR just feel stale.

I think the factor is that AE is a game of buildups and logistics which you can slowly observe in the AAR then a cataclysmic payoff when an offensive rolls out.

WITE is more like watching two sluggers go at it, slugging away.
Since rail movement lets you move units around terribly quickly, and logistics are only a long term limiting factor, there's less of an opportunity to outmaneuver your opponent strategically.

Now *tactically* is another matter, but that doesn't show up in AARs, all you see is the before and after.

ORIGINAL: pat.casey




I'm hooked playing, but I have to say that I enjoy AE AARs a lot more than WITE AARs. Perhaps its just that the style hasn't developed over there as much, but watching a WITE AAR just feel stale.

I think the factor is that AE is a game of buildups and logistics which you can slowly observe in the AAR then a cataclysmic payoff when an offensive rolls out.

WITE is more like watching two sluggers go at it, slugging away.
Since rail movement lets you move units around terribly quickly, and logistics are only a long term limiting factor, there's less of an opportunity to outmaneuver your opponent strategically.

Now *tactically* is another matter, but that doesn't show up in AARs, all you see is the before and after.

That is all very true. The AAR's are not as fun. But, I am writing for advice etc. Too much info and different strategies that I might not have thought of.

Nemo,

another perception for your collection [:)]

ORIGINAL: Nemo121
Ah, yeah, basically the old saw that "the easy way is always mined so come at them the way they never thought you could."

Sorry, can't resist opposing that summary, specifically because it offers a "oh, I just did not think of that" excuse, whereas the problems of some of us, like myself, are much more basic. Much more relevant issues are, as usually (which is why my advice to any future opponent of yours would be to read carefully and understand all that you have posted in these forums), to be found in other of your posts, e.g. inside your previous post #737 in this thread:

Well, I was fortunate that 1EyedJacks happened to not go hell for leather for Palembang. His initial desire to crush the Phillipines quickly gave my forces in Malaysia a tiny break and that's all I needed to put my plan into action.

In other words: Know what your must haves are and what is irrelevant. Then, analyze how the must haves may be obtained or denied. Repeat for the OPFOR.

That and the fact that I don't think he could believe the losses in ships I was willing to take off Malaysia. I literally fed him ships on a daily basis in order to give him a kill rate he thought was commensurate with victory ( and to keep him focussed on the easy pickings while most of my troopships actually survived ) whilst accomplishing the strategically vital goals elsewhere.

In other words: Know what "victories" are meaningful / define success correctly.

He also definitely didn't employ his airpower as well as possible early on. I think that is one of the big lessons from the game. All of these people talk about how Scenario 2 is so unbalanced in favour of Japan and how the Japanese =air force cannot be stood up to until 1943. Well, this is scenario 2 and when I meet the IJNAF and IJAAF I'm now getting 4 or 5 to 1 exchange rates in fighter vs fighter combat. It just shows you how different strategic approaches can result in hugely different games.

In other words: Know your capabilities and use them appropriately (and/or refrain from using them inappropriately). Note that the above quote contains this comment twice, once in a negative example (Japan) and once in a positive example (Allied).

We can't forget though that KB is almost entirely intact.... |His problem is that it just hasn't been allowed to be decisive as I run and hide when it shows up or just let it run into FlAK nests or take the opportunity to hit him in another theatre when it shows up. If he ever catches a naval force at sea with it though it'll be lights out for that fleet.

In other words: Do not use a key strategic assets to hunt for tactical success. If you do, it is up to your opponent to allow it to be decisive or not.

Just my 2cts.

Hartwig

edited to improve grammar/sentence/language

LOL! Hartwig, yes a very good appreciation of the situation.

My only quibble would be an explanation of the "come at them the way they never thought you could".... The sense of that phrase in English might be better served by substituting "judged" than "thought". It doesn't imply the inability to conceive the move but rather its dismissal as impossible and not worthy of full study.

So, I was saying very much what you argue afterwards... The "Oh I never thought of it" defence is invalid. You either should have thought of it OR ( much more likely ) did think of it but simply dismissed the possibility ( which is what usually happens ).


Overall though, spot on, I'd agree with everything you said there. Impressive "interpretation" of what I was getting at... Said it more succinctly than I was capable of doing.[:D]

Nemo,

ORIGINAL: Nemo121
My only quibble would be an explanation of the "come at them the way they never thought you could".... The sense of that phrase in English might be better served by substituting "judged" than "thought". It doesn't imply the inability to conceive the move but rather its dismissal as impossible and not worthy of full study.

So, I was saying very much what you argue afterwards... The "Oh I never thought of it" defence is invalid. You either should have thought of it OR ( much more likely ) did think of it but simply dismissed the possibility ( which is what usually happens ).

I dislike this way to put it also in this interpretation, because there is a risk that such a statement prepares the ground for problems with one's OODA cycle. If one derives the message "when playing Nemo, I always have to look at everything, no matter how unlikely it seems", the advice will most likely fire back and harm rather than help ones gameplay. That's why I would prefer saying things differently.

Said it more succinctly than I was capable of doing.

Actually, I would rather learn to do it more succinctly than you are capable of saying [8D].

Hartwig

Well, 1EyedJacks has called an end to this game due to RL issues.

I amn't looking for anyone to continue the game as I believe that the tipping point had been well and truly reached and the Japanese strategic situation was such that only a strenuous defensive action was possible.

This achieves the goal I had for showing how a strong forward fight could actually be viable and accelerate the Allied potential for offensives. It is also a good example of how offensive action is possible in spite of naval, aerial and carrier inferiority, which is a running theme in my games [8D]. At this stage I'm not sure I'd know what to do if I had a strong carrier force [:D].

passwords and game files available to anyone interested in looking over the end-position.

Mail me the turn and password, I might want to take a stab at this.

this AAR will likely end with the reconquest of Malaya, at which point the Japanese will throw in the towel.

Turns out I was wrong -- but I was overly optimistic![;)]

I was wondering if the Palembang fortress has been tried against the AI and what the results would be.

Could u send me games and pass, thank you !!! [:)]

Against the AI I imagine this would be even more effective as the AI simply doesn't have the brainpower to recognise the scale of committment necessary to a Festung Palembang strategy and thus won't ever commit the appropriate forces.

So, it would just send sub-optimal forces time and again and never actually enough to be decisive. It also couldn't react properly to counter-attacks occuring before their planned time. The AI only achieves some semblance of competence if the Allied player lets it follow a somewhat historical plan/timeline.


Traskott,
I'll have a look and see what I can find. Are you interested in the last turn file?

Yep!!! U have my email yet

PM me with it again just to be sure would you?

PM sent.