Gauging amphib performance

[AirGriff]

I'm in early '44 with my pbem and was wondering if my amphib ops are up to par. I have tried to go by the generally accepted method of using a division of troops versus every brigade size unit--enemy has a division, I bring 3 etc... and of course I bring lots of support depending on what's expected. So, assuming the IJ are at level 9 fortifications, have had airfield and port bombed fairly consistently for weeks, air attacks on "ground attack" for the day of the landing or maybe a couple days before, and supplies at the point where he can't repair the airfield and port--how long should it take to beat him out of the base? It's taking me at least a week or more in some cases.

Just curious if I'm putting enough oomph into my ops.

[Misconduct]

Well military doctrine says you need 3 attackers per 1 defender, honestly it seems to work pretty well in my PBEM so far. Honestly if the Japanese has 1 division defending, you bring 3 divisions of INF and at least 3+ Engineering units, you should be fine, you will take casualties of course, but in any case you really have to rely on what your going up against. Check this out, I recently took Iwo Jima on 8/30/43, my opponent had 14 divisions defending, and I dropped 18 divisions with at least 6 engineering units, 2-3 artillery. It took about 25 days (in game) to take him down simply because he was flying in supplies. However I started the attack by running only 4 carriers up there, and leaving 4 carriers ready to relieve them when they ran low on flight ops.
Constant CAP and overall bombardment - eventually it fell.

You really just have to go with the flow.

[AirGriff]

Yeah, I figure it should historically take a week or so, at least for a major engagement, and that's been the norm so far. I'm currently hitting Amboina and he's got just a mixed brigade, one of the better nav guards and some smaller stuff. Plus a ton of AA units and some base forces. I'm not sure what the hold up is, but he's holding up rather well against my 3 divisions, 2 armored bns, engineers, artillery and so on, and we're going on a week. Thought maybe I'd of had it by now.

14 divisions versus 18 at Iwo, eh? Wow. That's a titanic battle. Good stuff. Thanks for the info.

[Barb]

Well. Basicaly I would never assault anything with 14 divisions on it Instead i would use that 18 to capture 10 other places [:D]
Why going with head against the wall when you could make 5 steps to the right or left and bypass it?

[Misconduct]

Well problem is Barb I taken just about everything else, my hopping campaign - I have all of the North Philippines, from jetski to the north including manila and Clark. I have 450 LBA's pounding Okinowa right now, and Just took Iwo with 18 divisions that house 250 LBA's. So far im sitting pretty.

[engineer]

Typically, the end result of the island hopping campaign is to put your 4E bombers in range of the Home Islands and their industrial targets so you can start racking up lots of strategic victory points and softening the home islands up if you're so far behind that the only way to get to victory is taking ground on the Home Islands.  Historically, the Mariana's and B-29's served as the bombing base and a ground attack proved unnecessary.  If you have Luzon and Iwo, then you can start hitting targets near Tokyo and Kyushu right away with your B-24s. 
 
I'm curious about how the battle on Iwo came out point-wise.  In a purely gamey sense, the Japanese want to bleed the Allies on the attack so that they can't get to 2:1 odds in 1945.  Were your losses in squads, planes, ships and men worth getting the terrain?  Was Sakhalin or Hokkaido more strongly defended than Iwo? (Granted you need to plan amphib attacks in the summer up north or your divisions are gutted just getting through the surf).