Perfection, of a kind, spence (A) vs fcharton (J), no spence, please

[GreyJoy]

ORIGINAL: fcharton

May 1st 1943

I feel sorry about this AAR. Work has been very demanding lately, and various hobbies are using a lot of my free time. The war still rages on, but we’re down to four turns per week, three of them played real fast, motivation is low, and I lack the time to write the AAR.

I do realize there are lots of thing a serious JFB should do in 1943, and I think I am beginning to get a pretty good notion of what should be done while waiting for the long noses to invade. I need to move small detachment to dot bases, to prevent them from falling from autocapture (this forces the enemy to invade, and takes time, for very little cost). I also need to move air support and flak to the front. The old 24/48 SP per airfield is no longer enough in 1943, and I have quite a few flak units which do make a (small) difference. I need to take a better look at ship upgrades : this is the time when I get a lot of new devices, radar, ASW stuff, and the enemy navy has not yet reached its late war efficiency. And most importantly, I’m falling behind in pilot training. Spence obviously has a number of very good pilots in some of his frontline squadrons, while mine are mostly in TRACOM, and this is making a lot of difference.

I do realize all this, but each of those important actions is hundreds of clicks away, and use way too much time. I have said it before, my wish for WITP 2 is not a better model for this or that, or more detail, or better history, I just want a better user interface, which keeps the complexity as it is, but eliminate the ridiculous clicking, and all the shifting between the game and Tracker.

Just for the record, I’m pretty sure this wouldn’t need rewriting the engine. Basically, what is needed is some form of improved Tracker (without the database clutter and Java that need so much memory), which can not only view the content of a turn, but also edit and save modifications.

But anyway, I’m going on with this game. I’m not the best player around, and I’m not fighting at the best of my ability, but I won’t give the Allies an easy victory either. And I’ll know a lot of things if I ever play PBEM again (I doubt it, I think my next game will be against the AI).

Most of the action is happening in the air. Loss ratios are climbing as the allies get better planes and pilots and probably a lot more support, but his pools are not improving: in April, we shot down 500 allied planes, for 700 ours. From the numbers shot down, he must be low on P38, Spitfires and Hurricanes, and I am destroying more B24D than he produces.

Hellcats, the new kid on the block for April, were nowhere to be seen. He must have 120 of them by now. Allied fleet carriers were nowhere to be seen in April, and have reappeared around the Solomons a few days ago, obviously looking for battle.

He won’t have any. Most of KB in is Japan for upgrades, the rest moved to the Celebes, in the hope of catching enemy CVE which had been detected there, and were ready to support the next invasion.

And it worked… A week ago, enemy CVE sporting Corsairs and just a few bombers were parked in Babar, and trashed my bombers and fighters, while his invasion forces disembarked. Undetected, a lightweight KB moved in, and attacked unopposed.

Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Babar at 76,117
Weather in hex: Light cloud
Raid detected at 105 NM, estimated altitude 14,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 39 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 62
B5N2 Kate x 35
D3A1 Val x 38
D3A2 Val x 12

Allied aircraft
F4F-4 Wildcat x 70
F4U-1 Corsair x 13

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5 Zero: 14 destroyed
B5N2 Kate: 8 destroyed, 5 damaged
B5N2 Kate: 2 destroyed by flak
D3A1 Val: 1 destroyed, 6 damaged
D3A1 Val: 1 destroyed by flak
D3A2 Val: 2 destroyed, 2 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-4 Wildcat: 6 destroyed

Allied Ships
CVE Suwannee, Bomb hits 7, heavy fires, heavy damage
CL Columbia, Torpedo hits 1
CVE Chenango, Bomb hits 3, Torpedo hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
CVE Sangamon, Bomb hits 2, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
DD Lardner
CLAA Oakland
DD Saufley
CL Cleveland
CLAA San Juan, Torpedo hits 1
DD Stuart, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage

It was costly. I lost 65 carrier planes in the process, and since I didn’t know where enemy fleet carriers were, KB retired north, towards the Philippines. The Suwanee was lost, but my VP total went up by more than three hundred, so there is a good chance that at least another escort carrier sank. The next day, CLAA San Juan, CL Columbia and DD Stuart appeared in the sunk list.

This is the second time in a row I get an unopposed strike at enemy carriers. The last time, we damaged the Wasp, this time we sank a CVE or three. The next day, enemy fleet carriers reappeared in the Solomons. Spence is obviously looking for revenge, but I’m definitely not coming to his party. There is no point risking a trade in a CV battle right now.

Babar was the only invasion this month. Dili and Lautem are next, obviously, and I have not spent enough time reinforcing them, which is too bad. In Burma, the front is stable.

So, that was April 1943 for me. I can’t really complain, I only lost one base, sank one or two carriers, and shot down 500 planes, while not spending too much time on the game.

65 Carrier planes lost? That isn't expensive Francois! You can easily rebuild them and train up the pilots. These are the kind of "easy" victories that Japan should always look forward to. The allies will get hundreds of CVEs, but every little bit counts. These defeats may force him to keep all his CVEs togheder and to back them up with the CVs, thus limiting the operations they can develop at the same time

Well done!

[koniu]

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

65 Carrier planes lost? That isn't expensive Francois! You can easily rebuild them and train up the pilots. These are the kind of "easy" victories that Japan should always look forward to. The allies will get hundreds of CVEs, but every little bit counts. These defeats may force him to keep all his CVEs togheder and to back them up with the CVs, thus limiting the operations they can develop at the same time

Well done!

+1
In Year from now You will call that quiet day. 65 planes is not much in middle 43.
My last CV battle (December 43) cost me 500 planes and 350 pilots and i will say it was cheep victory

[fcharton]

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy
Very very handy Francois! Merci!!!!

Looking at those numbers, it's really impressive the numbers of a/c the allies get... and, mind you, when I was playing the allies, I've never had the perception to have all those air assets! Incredible how perception may differ depending on which side you play

Hi Greyjoy,

You're welcome. I have never played the allies, but I think this gives a pretty good idea of the level of air production we need. Right now, my air losses are about 2:1. I'm not a very good player (and I'm not very focused right now, too many other things happening), but I don't think you can get much better than 1:1.5 in mid 43, and losses like the ones I had in my carrier battle will only make it worse, as CV battles tend to be deadly for pilots.

At this rate, I think you need about 3000 planes/month in 43, just to keep up with the allies, and you need much higher loss rates than we usually get, too... Now, to link with your AAR, I think it would be very interesting to put this in perspective with supply availability.

I haven't done all the calculations, but I think Japan can produce between 30 and 40 million supplies during the game. I suspect it is relatively easy to estimate how much of it will be used by LCU (we can know how much troops use every month on average, replacement included, and we get the full OOB, in tracker). Base building is another expense, but I suspect it is lower than we think. The rest is use by the air force : factory repairs, supply for planes (on a mission basis, and so, depending on the number of planes in squadrons), and supply for replacements (on the basis of the nr of planes produced, how much is it by the way?)

This should give an idea of the maximum size of one's air force, and the trade offs between nr of planes, LCU replacements, and upgrades. This is a complex calculation, but I think it would be very enlightening: the more we play the game as Japan, the more we realize that, no, it is not all about oil, but about air frames...

A question for Pax and others AI players. I am seriously considering playing the allies when I have some free time (end of the year, I think). I want to get in their shoes, play the AI, and not spend too much time on it. What should I do? Are three day turns feasible? Do I need Scen 2 on hard, or rather Ironman on historical? I've never played the allies, or the AI, so any tip you have is welcome.

Francois

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: fcharton

A question for Pax and others AI players. I am seriously considering playing the allies when I have some free time (end of the year, I think). I want to get in their shoes, play the AI, and not spend too much time on it. What should I do? Are three day turns feasible? Do I need Scen 2 on hard, or rather Ironman on historical? I've never played the allies, or the AI, so any tip you have is welcome.

OK, so first off, is your goal to learn the allied OOB or to play and see what you think they might be able to do?

If it is to learn the OOB and have fun, then Ironman would be better. The AI will last longer, you should be able to go for 12 - 18 months pretty easy. Play on normal difficulty going to hard for 3 - 5 days each month.

If it is to check out what the allies might be able to do in the first 6 - 9 months, then go with a stock scenario (either 1 or 2). Play on hard difficulty with 3- 5 days/month on VERY HARD or VERY HARD all the time.

The stock scenarios will not challenge you at all, but you are then facing the correct OOB. If you don't care about the IJ OOB, then play the Ironman as the game will hold together much longer. Just be aware that the IJ OOB is NOT historical at all, there are a lot of Easter Eggs all over the place.

As for 1,2 or 3 day turns; that is up to you. The game is MUCH different with multi-day turns. It isn't any faster for me as I have to spend much more time on each turn thinking through consequences. So, I just play 1 turn days. After the first 15 turns or so, I get turns done in about 45 mins.

[fcharton]

May 6th 1943

We’re still moving, at a slow rate, and I’m not working very hard on each turn, but the game is moving forward, and this is good.

There is some sort of a pause in the air war. My front line squadrons are depleted, and need replacements to arrive. My pools are full, but with only 12 planes per week and per squadron, and then the time to repair them, they take a while to rebuild. The allies are obviously low on fighters too, and sweep and bomb prudently.

Right now, the air game looks a bit like an elaborate version of rock paper scissors. Everyday, I send my valid squadrons to sweep his bases, or to CAP my bases, hoping either to catch some hapless CAP, or to kill a few naive bombers. He tried to sweep the bases I CAP with P38 at high altitude, and when he achieves this, my fighters die in droves. And so, the end result depends on the base we’ve chosen, and as we both try to avoid obvious patterns, it is almost random.

The bright part of the air war is the ASW. After months of training, I’m having quite a few decent ASW pilots in the IJA, and Sally and Helen squadrons are scoring lots of hits. I am beginning to get a few decent E ships, too. On this subject, I was surprised to read on a recent thread that “only pilot ASW rating mattered”, ie not naval bombing. Is this the case? I have been spending a while training some of my good ASW pilots in NavB, if it doesn’t matter, I could save a lot of time… What do you think?

The rest of the war is a bit dull, but this suits me fine. I don’t have enough time to spend on each turn, so being able to do everything in half an hour, because nothing is really urgent, is just perfect.

My opponent let me know this is his longest game so far. Whereas I do understand the unhappiness of Allied players who see their games end before they receive all those virgins armed with radars and big bombs and heavy guns they have been promised as a reward for their suffering in 1942, I think I’m a in a position to understand how Japanese players get bored and leave. At my level of play, Japan is not strong enough to attack in 1943, and so the only thing you can do is to wait for the barbarians, and take care of details, which takes a lot of time for very little results, and with the promise that it will only get worse in the three or four years of real life time your game will last. And being historical doesn’t make it fun, or necessarily interesting.

I believe the real challenge for JFB, at this point of the game, is to find enough games within the game to keep going after the small things, and forget a bit about the big pictures. Somehow, we’d like to be “small men who rant at things they cannot do”… (Bukowski again)

Another game, maybe

With this game moving at a slow pace through dull 1943, starting a new, leisurely, game against the AI, in order to learn more about the system might be a way to get some of the interest back. I would sure prefer to play Japan, but I really don’t feel like going through the early invasions. That is why I was considering the Allies. I’ve been looking at other scenarios, too: I opened Downfall yesterday night and had a look.

Pax, your points are well taken. I think I will go for the ironman scenario: the ahistorical OOB is not a problem, as I want to learn the system more than the history. I’m still wondering whether to go for the allies or japan, and the number of days per turn. I am very seriously considering three day turns, as this could allow everything to move much faster. Or a small scenario (one with a decent AI)

News from Japan

It looks like I will get my Chinese translations published. A dozen poems appeared in an internet review a few months ago, then in the beginning of April, I read some at a “poetry banquet” a friend organized, and they were well received, and now it seems that an editor, who specializes in modern poetry, might be ready to sign on a first set of 150 poems (there are 600 in the series), and the author is cool with it.

I don’t expect to get rich or famous out of this, poetry doesn’t sell, and contemporary poetry even less so. Translations from modern Chinese poets, well…

But it is interesting anyway. I am slowly realizing how limited my French is. I used to think translating is a matter of knowing Chinese, I was wrong, it is the French that matters, and it is fascinating to understand how little we know our own language.

Anyway, the translation is done now, a Chinese friend is proofreading it, looking for those big and embarrassing mistakes or missed references, and I am trying to go back into every piece, trying to make a poem out of it. It would be much easier if I knew what a poem is, or should be. This is the weird reality of free verse. Some people seem to think that translating stuff that rhymes is harder, they are wrong: when it rhymes, or follows a strict form, the esthetics are imposed, with free verse, you need to bring your own, and your lack of taste, of depths, of education, will show, badly…

Today, my wife is planting the tomatoes she’s been sowing, growing and grafting, and that made my study look like a small jungle. Tomatoes used to be tropical plants, and they still look so. There is something Allied in growing vegetables. It is a sure bet: you start with nothing, but unless you do something very stupid, you will reap a nice crop in a couple of months. My wife is an AFB.

Translating poems, on the other hand, looks good and rewarding at first, but the more you do it, the more it seems impossible, and futile. Yet you go on, and those poems become so many bases you are trying to keep…

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: fcharton
Pax, your points are well taken. I think I will go for the ironman scenario: the ahistorical OOB is not a problem, as I want to learn the system more than the history. I’m still wondering whether to go for the allies or japan, and the number of days per turn. I am very seriously considering three day turns, as this could allow everything to move much faster. Or a small scenario (one with a decent AI)

Francois,

I haven't found a small scenario with decent AI. Guadacanal is the best of the small scenario's, but .... be sure to play on HARD or VERY HARD.

As mentioned above, I have not found 2 or 3 day turns to go faster for me. I spend too much time trying to anticipate all that might happen for those 2 or 3 days. I will say this, it will give that AI a huge advantage which it needs. Yeah, I'm 99% sure that the AI reacts every day no matter whether you are 2 or 3 day turns. So, you review your troops every 3 days, the AI checks every day ...

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: fcharton

The bright part of the air war is the ASW. After months of training, I’m having quite a few decent ASW pilots in the IJA, and Sally and Helen squadrons are scoring lots of hits. I am beginning to get a few decent E ships, too. On this subject, I was surprised to read on a recent thread that “only pilot ASW rating mattered”, ie not naval bombing. Is this the case? I have been spending a while training some of my good ASW pilots in NavB, if it doesn’t matter, I could save a lot of time… What do you think?

To th best of my knowledge, yes. ASW training encompasses everything. You only need that skill and with that mission the pilots will search and bomb based upon that skill, not NavSearch and NavBomb.

[Lowpe]

For absolute fun, nothing beats AnyMacs Nasty and NastyNasty scenarios.

Not historic in the least, but an absolute blast!

I, too, have looked at Downfall but never took the plunge. Someday.[:)]

[fcharton]

Thanks a lot, I might have a look at the ironman or nasty scenario at some point in the future (see below, though...).

The game is still moving. We're playing four turns a week, and are now on the 14th of May. The air war is getting heavier, as allied production figures go up. On a typical day like today, I lose 50 planes, and he loses 35. 4E bombers are pretty much unstoppable. I kill half a dozen of them every day, but they come in scores, and will close any base in one or two days. So, basically, the air game mostly consists in rotating fighter squadrons in and out, losing planes and pilots in droves, and hoping the enemy is (still) getting the worst part of the deal.

Sometimes, a few more things happen. Two days ago, our Betties from Rangoon sank a troop transport off Chittagong. Whether those guys were trying to land in Cox Bazaar or Akyab will never be known, as everyone sailed back to India. Yesterday, an enemy task force was detected off Hansa Bay, but didn't bombard or land. Today, we had something like a landing in Finschafen, but the enemy got very heavy losses, and no unit appears in the hex. Can they be here and not be detected (I have units in this base, so this would be strange)?

I have to admit that playing this game has become some sort of a chore. I am forcing myself, and trying to do everything as seriously as I can, and I'll probably have a couple of nice victories before the final defeat, but the whole strategic situation is incredibly dull and predictable, and as the magic of discovering the system is a bit lost after several years of play, each turn just becomes a routine. I can, and will, cope with it, and might even be glad that I've done all that in the end, but I don't think it can be called "fun".

I'm afraid there are two reasons for this. One is the strategic situation: unless one player does much better than history, the whole war is just too asymetric. In the beginning, Japan is very strong, in the end the Allies are very strong, and in the middle, the balance shifts from one to the other, but the shift is so slow that this middle period uses up most of the war. By doing well, or badly, as Japan, you can move the dates for those three "epochs". For instance, botching your early invasions will make the early phase longer, finishing china will, too (this was my case), and losing the KB will have the opposite result, of course. But overall, the structure of the game won't change unless opponents are very badly matched. And this means there has to be a very long period of time, in the middle of the game, where very little happens, and everything is very scripted, and moves very slowly.

The second reason is that I'm playing too slowly for the game. Unless you are really crazy about the era, and the details of it (this is not my case, I'm interested, mind you, but not fascinated), you need to play more than a turn per day to keep the game moving at a decent speed, allowing one to "feel" the change in the overall situation, and shortening the long lull in between.

And this is the catch for Japan, I believe. As the strategic situation gets more and more obvious, and the balance shifts hopelessly, most of your fun, as Japan, tends to come from the complexity of the system, and the micromanagement possibilities that go with it, the small wars in the large one, if you will. But unless you have a lot of free time, the more you micromanage, the slower the game becomes, and the duller the strategic progress seems...

Of course, all of this is very personal, and I can understand some Japanese players actually enjoy all this (although the small number of games that get into late 43 suggests it takes a very special frame of mind), but AE doesn't really work for me anymore. I am proceeding with the game, and will try to post reports and maps from time to time, but I'm afraid the "written" part of this AAR ends here.

It has been nice working on it, though...

Francois

[fcharton]

I have promised I would post maps on stuff from time to time, all the more as PDU Off seems to have become the manly option to play, lately. But today is one for the blog, just as off-topic and personal as blog posts tend to be…

June 4th

Military history is nice, because as soon as a war is over, generals and correspondents write their memoirs, and Hollywood produces movies, and technical manuals get released, and armchair generals write commentaries, and software houses publish games, which allow old men to feel like they are part of it, while they fiddle with overgrown ruleset, memorize specs and organization charts, and rant at computer screens.

Military history is nice, because even though we love to speak such words as “lest we forget”, everything is written down, in triplicate, and there is very little risk anything might get lost.

But not every fact in history gets that chance. And so, lest we let wiki and official accounts take over…


By that third of June, everything was all so obvious. Just after martial law was declared, there had been a few happy days. Every night, a large part of the population of Peking was out in the streets, chatting, rambling, sometimes even strolling down to take a look at the soldiers on the other side of the ring road. A bunch of nice kids from the countryside, really.

Then, evening papers had started publishing those all too familiar calls to peace, signed by some anonymous “retired teacher”, “former cadre” or “young engineer”, reminiscent of the 70s. Happiness had become doubt, and then resignation. All of this would end, soon and badly.

And so, on that third of June, when it was said that there had been brawls, last night, between workers and soldiers, and that clashes had taken place in the afternoon, around Babaoshan, the revolutionary cemetery, of all places, it seemed obvious that it would happen tonight. Some went downtown, some stayed home, some tried to lock the kids in, not always successfully.

But by the evening, you couldn’t escape it. The night was all lights, and shots, and cries. And the next morning, some came back, but wouldn’t talk.

It went on for a couple of days, and then it was possible to go downtown again. Not in the centre, because of the soldiers and the tanks, but on the outskirts, where you could see burnt trucks, overthrown railings, and, everywhere, small altars, with a couple of names, a burnt shoe, a dirty T-shirt, a kid sandal once.

And then, it all calmed down. TV stations went on broadcasting boring programs, and very old-fashioned movies. Foreign embassies sent large planes to collect their expats and their families, who made very moving declarations upon arrival back home, there were protests in front of embassies, and nice words by politicians, and even a few student leaders reappearing here and there, and telling about their ordeal.

And it became less and less interesting. Over there people were arrested, some disappeared for good, other came back broken. But everything returned to normal, as official interpretations replaced absent eyewitnesses. Over the years, it became some annual rendez-vous, with the same stories, the same commentaries, in the same indifference.

This fourth of June, it will be 25 years, and the kids of that time will soon be fifty. And there still is time, but if nothing changes, year after year, memories will die, and only the kitsch will be left. And those who did not return home, on the morning of the fourth, will have died in vain.

On the fourth of June, have a thought for those kids, so that maybe one day history get written.

Francois, 25 in 89

[fcharton]

I had promised irregular updates on the game, here is one.

May 28th, 1943

May 1943 was a bad month for the Empire. I haven’t lost a lot of material, and even sank a few allied ships, but the pace of Allied advance has become very fast, and I am totally lost about how to counter it.

In the Celebes, Boela was captured on the 20th. I thought Sorong, Ternate and surroundings, both built-up, and in range of Air HQ, made that impossible without carrier support, and that the defeat in Babar would make my opponent prudent with his CV and CVE. But apparently, air support was not needed. He went without and all my bombers managed to sink was a transport carrying an engineer unit. Boela fell in two days, and then Sorong was bombed, and closed in a day…

In New Guinea, Finschafen was invaded around the 15th, then Saidor the 20th and Madang yesterday. I thought Hansa Bay (level 6 airfield), Madang (level 4), Manus (level 5) and Rabaul (level 8) would cover such landings, but it wasn’t the case. Two visits of long range B24 (operating from Taberfane, I believe) were enough to close Hansa Bay (90+ damage, takes weeks to repair), and Manus (those were B17E from Rabaul), and Rabaul is inoperant as any small TF hanging around closer than the landings will be targeted by the AI, and protect the landing forces (or at least divide my force, so that even very long range CAP is very efficient).

Most of KB was in Japan for repairs. It is on its way back, and I hope to provide my opponent with a few bad surprises. But I haven’t seen enemy carriers in a while, and I suspect they are waiting somewhere, hoping for such an opportunity. So far, I’ve won most of the carrier engagements, but the Allies have better planes now, and better radar too. Meanwhile, I am trying to send cruisers and destroyers catch some of his transports. I don’t think this will work, but I have to try, at least.

All this is extremely worrying. I have 200 AV in Madang, behind level four forts, and on what I used to consider as decent supply stocks. But my infantry seems bent on wasting its ammo on useless bombardments, and the amount of supplies burnt by air bombing suggest my stocks won’t last long. My opponent has one reinforced division, which I suspect will take the place in a couple of days (this is what happened pretty much everywhere).

Once this happens, several divisions in New Guinea are doomed. They are experienced, supplied and behind forts, but they can’t be fed, and my experience shows that a unit becomes totally ineffective in less than a month under such conditions. Also, I have very little in term of stopping power to prevent Spence from rolling me north up to Sorong. I used to think I had a pretty solid position between Rabaul, Lae/Wau and Manus/Hansa Bay. BUt it wasn’t the case, and I have little in term of second line (units and bases).

The other fronts are pretty static. I still hold all of Burma, central pacific is calm and raids against the Kuriles have stopped. But then, there probably is little point moving there when you can achieve such breakthroughs in the South Pacific.


In game term, everything is fine so far. I haven’t lost significant material, VP ratio is 2.36 to one, for Japan, and the victory in China means the Allies will need a lot of points to achieve victory. Over the course of the month, the allies lost more than 500 planes, and I lost 700, a decent ratio at this time of the war. Supply, fuel and oil stocks are fine, as is my industry.

Yet, I don’t see how I can do something meaningful to counter, or at least slow, the Allied advance. There is not real use in counterinvading one base or two along the coast, when the Allies can conduct such speedy advances. KB can (and will) certainly make them pay once or twice, but we are at the time when a direct confrontation with Allied carriers, especially in the presence of LBA is a risk, and I see no point in gallantly sending Kido Butai on a death ride without a strategic objective. And note that the presence of KB doesn’t seem to deter my opponent (whoever said Midway had any strategic importance must have been badly mistaken). I am trying to use my navy to punish some of his moves, but again I don’t want to be foolhardy just to keep myself busy between one invasion and the next. The most sensible thing to do, right now, is to ferry lots of troops and supplies to the Philippines, so that the Allies don’t have too easy a fight there.


As a player, I find it is difficult to strike a balance between the fast-playing and fun tactical aspects of the game (sending task forces, setting CAP traps, that kind of things), and the time consuming and very unrewarding (where you’re Japan in 1943) long term concerns. Worse still, the temptation to shorten the agony by not planning your defenses too well is always there.

[PaxMondo]

Wish I had a solution for you Francois, but I really don't. I don't think anyone can hold NG as the IJ in '43 unless you are willing to commit a lot of air power there. LCU's alone cannot hold any position, you have to maintain air supremacy over your base or no matter what it is doomed.

And sticking the ENG units required to support 1000 planes in NG just screams bypass for the allies ... and then all of those units are not available where you need them ... like the PI. The answer for me is the NG is just too far to attempt to hold. I take the bases, suck everything from them and then leave. My defensive perimeter is farther north .... (map direction that is [;)] )

[obvert]

The thing I learned trying to defend in New Guinea is that anything you can do to slow the advance will help in the long term. If Boela is gone the next fortifications that really matter should be around Mindanao I'd think. You can still get the KB in position of rthe places where he'll have to take a bit of a leap, like toward the Molucaas or Celebes.

It's a tough road playing late game Japan. Take pleasure in the tactical victories and small strategic holds and prepare for the long slow grind of the next few years.

[fcharton]

June 16th 1943

We’re still moving, but at a very slow rate, as work is a bit demanding on my side.

In New Guinea, Madang fell easily to the second deliberate attack. I had a reinforced regiment, behind forts, but a few weeks of air bombing had destroyed all their supplies, and one naval bombardment was all it took to send disruption in the high 50s, and doom the units.

Once Madang has fallen, and its level four airfield is rebuilt (a matter of days for allied engineers), Lae becomes almost impossible to protect, and my opponent has been landing troops there, uncontested, for over a week. He'll attack once he judges he has enough, and will take the base, and move on. And in the end, three division worth of troops, all behind prepared positions, will be lost.

A week ago, KB struck against the landings in Madang. We sank a CA Northampton and a Canadian corvette (the Dawson). CL Trenton was reported sunk a few days later, but I doubt it. This was a good strike, but it failed to hinder the landings.

In the Dutch Indies, KB disrupted the landings in Babo. We couldn’t prevent the base from falling, but sank at least three CLAA (Juneau, San Juan and San Diego), a light cruiser (Helena) and two destroyers, a troop ship (unfortunately empty) and a pair of cargoes.

Finally, a raid against a supply run in Port Blair sank CA Cornwall and CLAA Van Heemskerck, and possibly CA Frobisher. In Burma, my opponent in reinforcing his line, but the front, along the indian border, is stable.

The air war is becoming increasingly unbalanced. Over the first half of the month, I lost 680 planes to 320 allies, but when it comes to fighter losses, the ratio is much worse. With 130 Hellcats and 30 Corsairs produced every month since May, my opponent can afford to commit modern fighters most of the time, and it will only get worst next month, when he gets 50 P-38H and as many P47-D2. In terms of speed, all but the Hellcat are much faster than my fastest fighter (Tojo), and neither my Zeroes or Oscar can cope with them. This means I’m stuck with ever increasing exchange rates, at a time when Allied production is getting larger than mine (I’m producing 1500 planes a month, and so do the Allies).

Next month, I’m getting the Oscar IIIa and the Tojo IIc, I began producing the A6M5b in June. I’m not sure they will make a lot of difference, though.


Overall, the current situation seems pretty typical of the mid-game period, when Japan has to spend troops, and planes, and ships, to try and delay the juggernaut.

New Guinea and Burma are the two sides of the coin. In the former, sending lots of troops to Lae and the area allowed me the keep the Allies off the Bismarck Sea until now. And moving lots Chinese troops to Burma means the Allies are stuck on the Indian border, and will probably remain there until I choose to retreat. I believe this is a good thing, as once the allies begin moving forward, their advantage in supply capacity and building speed means they can build their forward bases (and the umbrella under which they advance) much faster than you can build your defenses. And the game is soon over once they get in range of your industry.

But then, manning your front position means losing those troops early in the game, since the game offers little options in term of evacuation and retreat. I believe this summarizes the midgame Japanese dilemma: how many troops are you ready to throw away, in order to delay Allied advance. If you are too conservative, Allies bombers will get into range of your factories much too early. If you are too lavish, you won’t have the reserves to hold the line, once the front is broken.

I believe this justifies the aggressive strategies, where Japan moves much farther than its historical perimeter, that seem to have become so popular among seasoned AE players. The best way to slow Allied advance, is to make it as long as possible.

Is this “history done right” (as wargaming should be)? I have my doubts about it. The idea that the correct way to play Japan is to capture all of China, just after declaring war upon the US, and then go for Manila instead of Hawaii, because you’d rather have the subs than the old BB, and then jump for Perth, or Bombay, or Noumea, or maybe even all of them, sounds a bit like “blitzkrieg gone mad” to me.

On the other hand, the idea that, in this game and many others that reached mid-43, Japan, not having lost KB at Midway, having better supplies because of scenario 2, and having managed a larger perimeter than historical, could be 100% on the defensive by 1943 seems a bit exaggerated. And the fact that many games where the Allies fared much worse than historical in 42 end up with resounding Allied victories in 44 adds to the suspicion.

The more I think about it, the more I’m convinced something is wrong in the grand scenario, which suggests something is rotten in the system itself. More precisely, I think the system favours offense and underplays defense. This is the reason why the Allies, once production and reinforcements set in, can raise from the dead and land in Korea in 44. This is also the reason why Japan can, and should, take China, no matter the home rules and stacking limits. And this explains why going for Karachi, Tahiti or Auckland are sound goals for June 1942…

Why is this so? I think the system downplays friction, in the most Clausewitzian sense of the word (Murphy, in modern parlance). In the game, like in reality, lots of things can go wrong, no doubt, and this is why AE is a great game, but if you push the correct buttons, everything will go right, much righter than it should. And the lack of friction favours offense over defence.

Why is this so? I believe this happens because AE was developed by a mixture of servicemen and scientists (some being both, you know who you are), who tend to trust their tools (formulae or doctrine) a bit more than they should. In my opinion (note that I’m saying that on my AAR, and wouldn’t venture to go as far on some other forum thread), you see this a lot on the forum, where the typical ‘rant’ thread, is always “why was this not successful?” and never “why didn’t this fail?”, and the typical response is “you forgot to push button X and Y, silly you (and please read thread nr XXX our google up question nr YYY)” and seldom “because never ever gets right”.

Where am I getting at? I think Clausewitz got it right, when he explains friction (or Murphy) is what explains why we don’t “get to the extremes” (ie why winner doesn’t take all, ie why it is not all about size). There is something asymmetric in war, which make offense unjustly hard, and defense unreasonably easy. And I think this is what AE fails to model accurately.

And the result, in the grand campaign of a very involving and time consuming game , is very unfortunate : it means lots of (allied) players will drop in 1942, as the all powerful Japanese get everything they want, all the time, and the rest (Japanese) will drop in 43, once they’ve lost the KB, and everything gets mad.

But there are counterexamples? Yeah,but look at them : counterexamples only happen when the match is terribly unbalanced. Nemo can defend in 42, yeah, but he’s Nemo. Rader can manage against an absolute newbie, but only until 43, since the newb happened to be Greyjoy.

Right, sorry, if I sound like I’m ranting, I didn’t mean to. I believe what I wanted to explain is that we either need shorter scenarios (but then we lose the production side of Japan, which is bad) or a serious reflection about GC balance. And if you're an AFB reading this, keep in mind that unless the AI becomes what it isn't now, and unless you're one of those types who delight reading the rules and not playing the games, you need happy JFB to play...

[Lowpe]

ORIGINAL: fcharton
And the result, in the grand campaign of a very involving and time consuming game , is very unfortunate : it means lots of (allied) players will drop in 1942, as the all powerful Japanese get everything they want, all the time, and the rest (Japanese) will drop in 43, once they’ve lost the KB, and everything gets mad.

But there are counterexamples?

I think there is a middle way...and when I get bummed looking at Allied strength, etc, I go back and read some of Captain Crufts excellent AAR. What an absolute pity it died before completion.[:(]

He did not over exploit early, he was looking to win the end game, protect the Hive. A really interesting strategy, and he was using interesting tools to get there and personal preferences (like not wanting to build George because it was ugly and nose heavy[:D])

His outlook was really fresh, he kind of was looking forward to running out of fuel/oil. He didn't conquer China, etc. Was losing lots of ships to submarines, etc... he almost pulled off a masterpiece at Hong Kong.

Ok, it is a more boring way to play Japan, that is until the end. He got enjoyment from little things...Rex's flying out of dot bases for unescorted bombers, etc.

Yeah, it sucks being Japan in mid 43, and even more in mid 44, and even worse in mid 45. But I don't think the game engine is broken...more like the players have much better foresight and planning and naturally favor the bold offensive.

[PaxMondo]

Francois,

Well, and like you said AFB's need to control themselves a bit, the single largest un-balancer in this game is hindsight for the allies. Like JWE said a couple of days ago, Truk was just a lagoon with a few service ships, not the huge operational front naval yard that the allies thought it was. Ditto everything else. The allies were IRL methodical, slow, careful because they didn't know. They thought IJN had many more CV's than they had ... they thought there was a squadron of Yamato's ... etc etc etc.

The truth, now known, is that everything was on a shoestring. The allied players know this. All they have to do is await '43 Essex deliveries, concentrate their forces, and the IJ historically is NOT able to stop them. They don't have enough of anything to do it.

To counteract that 20/20 hindsight, to make the game at least somewhat challenging for the allied player and keep it fun for a while for the IJ so that there actually are IJ players you must give the IJ players some a-historical bonuses in the GC game OR only play very short scenarios (like JWE). There really isn't much middle ground here.

You are in a Scen 2, but PDU off. PDU off is a nightmare for the IJ. It locks the IJ into historical aircraft plans while the allies are free to exploit their knowledge of true IJ dispositions and capabilities. I applaud anyone who attempts a PDU OFF game (like I applauded you), as I will never attempt one again, not even against the AI (especially Andy's Ironman AI). [;)]

PDU ON is a key balancer: it removes some of the allied players hindsight. That forces them to be a bit more cautious. Yes, many IJ players over-produce AC and by early '44 are out of supply and crash their economy and the game ends abrubtly. However, that is starting to be realized and in recent AAR's it appears that some of the IJ players are being a bit more realisitc with their 42/43 AC production. Xargun and Kaleun's AARs come to mind.

So, where you are now ... in WWII neither side could hold a position, no matter the initial fortification, when the other side wanted it. They could take it back, but you can't hold it. This is true in the game: you cannot hold any position that the allies want. PzB showed all IJ players how to play, delay and counterstrike. His mastery of that is gold. Waigapoe was just one example. He also proved with Christmas island that you cannot hold a position, no matter what.

Rather than attempting to strongly garrison everything, you need garrison lightly just enough to force the allies to land obstructed. Then you need to be able to counter, HARD. If you can't, don't defend. Re-entrench back to a point that you can. For me that is to basically the PI. Sometimes I might try the Marianans, but they are tough. And PDU OFF. they might very well be impossible.

As for AC, in a PDU OFF game, no you do not have any AC to counter the allies 1:1. The only counter you have are numbers. Large numbers. My guess is that you need 3:1 numbers with Oscar/Zero in any dogfight now to have a chance. Very difficult to bring those numbers to bear. But really, I wouldn't fight unless I can get those odds. In '44 you will need 4:1 or higher, because you are still essentially Oscar/Zero. Even in '46, the number of air groups that are still constrained to Zero/Oscar is very high. But that's the game.

So, back up. Look where you can get the numbers advantages that you need. Get those AF's ready to support those numbers. Create some smokescreens to disguise your real MLR. Can you win? Heck no. [;)] Can you bloody the allies nose? Oh yeah. Can you keep him out of the HI? In a PDU OFF game, that would be a MASTER - STROKE achievement. So, that would be my goal. Just keep him out of the HI .... very tough. Maybe doable. I really don't know ... hopefully you can show us.

[&o][&o][&o]

[GreyJoy]

Don't know if i completely agree here Francois.
Don't really think the game favours the offender so much over the defender.
To be honest, in my last allied game (against Mr.Kane) i felt the opposite. Even i late 1944 i felt there were places i couldn't break through, no matter how hard i tried.
PDU OFF seems to be the best way to re-create a bit of balance in mid-game periods.
With PDU ON a good IJ player could easily force the allies to a statlemate in the air, even in mid 1944.
No matter how good your P-47s are, if Japan s able to field endless number of KI-84r and N1K5s since mid 1943 and waves of KI-83 starting from 1944, the allies will simply never get through.

However, i agree with Pax: NG is more or less undefendable for the Empire once the allies break the line. I've been right there against QBall and the best thing i could do was to make him pay for every advance he took (just like you're doing!).
As Pax said, you need to garrison everything and at the same time keep a good bunch of troops and materials to be able to build another line back in the PI while the allies get their bloody noses in NG...

[JocMeister]

Very good post Francois. [&o]

I think you are touching a very important point about AE in its current state. To put it simply the balance is gone and this has a very simple explanation. JFBs and AFBs simply got a lot better at what they are doing. This is I think why we are seeing (in some games) these huge swings in momentum. This is made worse by complete knowledge about your opponents strengths and weaknesses. Completely knowledge on what arrives, when and where and how much.

This is nothing special and it happens in every MP game. This is especially evident in MMPORPGs or online shooters like COD/BF/CS where they can release hundreds of patches just to fix imbalances as players find them, and exploit them. This is the nature of human beings. If you find something that will give you an advantage over your opponent(s) you will use it. All developers know this and spend a lot of time trying to find the right balance between everything.

Sadly I don´t we are going to see this kind of necessary balancing done from the developers. Most likely there will never be any more "official" patches. So we need to look for MODs to get some better balance.

I think JIII is on the right path with his latest mods by veering away from "history" and trying to make the game more "fun" to play for both sides. This is what I personally feel is needed for the MP community of AE. Most of us who play MP doesn´t care too much about "historical plausibility" or trying to reenact the war. We want to play a fun game. Of course there are exceptions to this and some players are probably happy playing their PBEMs in a historical manner. But personally I would like to see a more competitive Scenario/Mod that would see the allies stronger in 42/43 and the Japanese stronger in 44/45 compared to how the game currently is. The game does not get better by giving the Japanese more stuff early on as SCEN 2 does. In 9 cases out of 10 it only makes the Japanese player push harder, further and stronger in 42 rather then using those extra assets as a buffer in 43-44. And when the air goes of of that push the Japanese end up having burnt the candle in both ends and quickly collapses and resign.

I realize getting such a mod done would be a monumental task. But I would certainly play it and I think many other would too. And there is certainly no lack of talent and ingenuity in the AE mod community. JuanGs solution how to give the allied player the ability to "buy" planes is simply pure genius. [:)]

Regarding PDU ON I share what GJ says. JFBs can squeeze so much out of the industry at this point that I strongly feel the game is very close to unplayable with PDU ON. This was very evident in GJs game vs Tom where he simply swept the allies aside by focusing on a few extremely good models while having almost unlimited numbers. I´m not sure it won´t be the other way around with PDU OFF though. If it is then it only proves my point about the need of trying to find a balance in the game again. PDU ON was probably perfectly fine in the first PBEMs before JFBs got really good at streamlining the industry. We finally have a couple of games going on with PDU OFF and some fantastic JFBs behind the wheels. If they cannot hack it with PDU OFF then no one will. These 3 games will certainly be enough to pass verdict on PDU ON/OFF once and for all.

Personally I think the verdict will be that none of them work very well...

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

... And when the air goes of of that push the Japanese end up having burnt the candle in both ends and quickly collapses and resign.

... PDU ON was probably perfectly fine in the first PBEMs before JFBs got really good at streamlining the industry. We finally have a couple of games going on with PDU OFF and some fantastic JFBs behind the wheels. If they cannot hack it with PDU OFF then no one will. These 3 games will certainly be enough to pass verdict on PDU ON/OFF once and for all.

Personally I think the verdict will be that none of them work very well...

If I put your above sentence with PDU ON (which you did not intend), I agree with you. That is why I am interested to see how Kaleun and Xargun end up ... they are being more conservative with their economy.

JFB's are better at the economy, but if you build 2000 Tojo/month, you will collapse in '45 or sooner. We have seen that repeatedly. Almost every AAR last year ended up that way; the IJ couldn't make it to 1/45 as they ran out of supply. Even the ones they won (Mr Kane), the IJ was completely backrupt. In fact, it is very hard not to collapse it at half that rate. So, if I am playing the allies, (if, as you know I don't [;)] ), about the only HR I would insist on would be predetermined minimum supply levels to ensure the IJ player isn't doing something stupid that will kill the game. Something simple like:
Start = 3.5M supply
1/43 = 4.5M
1/44 = 5.5M

This basically forces the IJ player to NOT implode their economy until such a time as there is no choice. If they have at least 6M supply empire wide 6/44, they are able to mount a credible defense. 8M is better, but even 6M would prevent the insane numbers of AC in 42/43.

As the allied player, now I know that I have a game where some rationality is in place. I know my opponent isn't going to kami his entire country in '42 which isn't a realisitic option. Both Hitler and the IJ junta had to down play the war heavily until '43 to the general populace to avoid internal repercussions. call the supply levels the "butter margins" that both dictators had to employ to keep civil unrest in check.

Or maybe the IJ players have learned not to implode their economies on their own ....

Just a thought ....

[fcharton]

Sorry for the long delay, September was probably the busiest month I ever had. Just as we were trying to get a very big client (Publicis) to sign with us, issues that hadn’t been checked for a while began going wrong, and so, as the owner, lead developer, oldest kid on the block, and only one with some experience of this specific market, I ended up being developer, tester, data troubleshooter, and spec writer, trying to meet all the deadlines you need in September if you want the contract to begin in January. This meant very long hours, seven days a week, so much for the image of the lazy Frenchman… We’re mostly out of it now. My younger colleagues are getting back into the game, our prospect didn’t notice anything, I slept away the very long hours. And today, I sent Spence my first replay in a month. The game looks a bit like a blank slate to me, which might actually be a good thing.

Fortunately, Spence was on holiday during half of the month. He and his wife visited northeastern France (Verdun, Alsace, and the Ardennes), and we had a chance to meet when they were in Paris (this might have been the only evening in September when I didn’t work). The Pacific didn’t feature prominently on the menu, but we had dinner (frog legs for Spence, with a pretty decent white Mercurey), a long walk through the city (Paris is a very walkable city because it is relatively small), a couple of drinks, and a good chat. I couldn’t help bu notice that a very specific centre of interest, like AE, tends to bring together “compatible” people. Spence is exactly the kind of people I tend to like in real life, without AE. So… dear readers, if you’re in Paris and have an afternoon or evening off, I’m a PM away…

But back to the game and the discussion. First thank you very much for all the responses, they do make a lot of sense. Lowpe, I did read Cruft’s AAR, which was a lot of fun, but whereas there are a lot of tactical gems in it, the overall approach is very specific. As Cruft explains in the beginning, the whole thing is predicated on a very conservative Allied opponent (just the opposite of what we get most of the time), and PDU On. Note also that in 44, his perimeter was extremely small. But I agree with you that Cruft, or Obvert’s AAR against Jocke are great reads, because they never throw the towel, and you get a lot of tactical ideas for the late game (I wish I could do this).

But your points on hindsight are well taken. Just knowing what your reinforcement schedule looks like is an enormous departure from reality.

JocMeister, I agree with you on balance, and the fact that giving Japan new toys might not be the way to go. In my opinion, a much better balancing act would be to reduce the US reinforcements, to compensate for the hindsight. A similar approach could help balancing the early Japanese expansion: make some of the ships, and troops, that were’nt used in the early expansion, reinforcements, and Japan will have to operate on a tighter budget than what we usually see.

The idea is always the same: you have more information than your historical counterparts, thanks to hindsight, but you can’t act on it, because the OOB limits the number of units you may actually deploy.

Pax, I really like your points on supply expenses. I think this is a real problem with AE: the game is so long that it almost never gets into 45, in fact many games get decided in 42, with one side conceding victory after losing the carriers (which IMO is totally ahistorical). And even if you don’t throw the towel, 1945 is so far down the game that there is little incentive to play conservatively. We’re seeing it in many current games: trying to break Allied will, and force them to surrender in 42 after they lost their carriers, is the soundest approach for Japan, even if it means making your economy unsustainable. I think the length of the game is a problem, here. Most of us don’t really expect to see 45 when we begin a game. In fact, the GC tends to be a 1942 scenario…

Anyway, thank you very much for all the replies, and back to the game. I need to get back into the war, and start planning my defenses. I will update this AAR on a more regular basis (it does help a lot…). Right now, the game looks like a blank slate : the little planning I had done was lost in the September work craze, and I need to look at this game just as if it were the first turn of a scenario.

Looking back at the game so far, I realize I didn’t plan enough, and this was partly because I lack the tools. Tracker is a great reporting tool, but I’ve never really managed to use it for planning. I’m not crazy about having tons of Excel spreadsheets managing the war. It looks a bit like an accountant’s nightmare. I’m pretty sure something can be done, using Tracker as a source of information. I’ve been learning Ruby recently and it might be a good way to try and see how it works in real.