Matrix Games Forums

Is there any chance for the allies to hold port moresby against a human opponent who decides to make that base his main objective (like using 2nd and 38th Division to go in including all carriers available at that time)?


Sven

No [:D]

thought so, just wanted to be reassured.[8D]

Whoa. I don't think it's all that cut-and-dried. For one thing, it depends on the scenario. I have to assume that this discussion is about the full campaign scenarios, 17 and 19. In sc. 19, it's probably true, as this is the "maximum Japanese effort in the South Pacific" setting. Still, the odd early disaster to Japanese carrier air supremacy or Allied LBA catching an unprotected transport force can turn things around very quickly.

This is even more true in sc. 17, where the Japanese have only one advantage at the beginning: a shortage of American carrier fighters. If you are crafty enough, and if the gods are willing and your IJN opponent slips up, you can give the Japanese a bloody nose in the "Coral Sea period," where the Japanese are short on everything from ground forces to surface combatants.

You can do such things as run quick reinforcements to Gili-Gili, Buna, and Port Moresby, launch a ground campaign against Lae through Wau, and seed a lot of LBA into Port Moresby to hunt down IJN transport shipping. You may have to retreat, but make 'em pay the price, says I.

There is a second (very brief) window of opportunity for the Allies in sc. 17, as well, when the F4F-4s are arriving in significant numbers and the first two reinforcement carriers show up before the Japanese death star mass does. I have sometimes been able to cobble together a successful (though costly) defense of both Port Moresby and Lunga - of course, the better Japanese players usually beat this down, but, at the same time, I buy a lot of time and cost the Japanese a lot of materiel.

The same general principles apply when you are playing those hyper-aggressive Japanese commanders who go hell-bent for Noumea, Luganville, Townsville, or other such vital places. Remember that these are over-extended operations that have to have limitations and weaknesses to them. Try to find those and exploit them to the max.

Play like your hair's on fire (I'd much rather die as Lee than live as Fechteler). After all, nobody's getting hurt, it's only a game. If you get your @$$ kicked, you can always say, "Nice game, I learned a lot. Want to play again?" If you win, you can say, "Mogami? Yeah, average player, I guess..."

Take nothing for granted. Be creative. Try for tactical surprise. You'll lose some, but you'll win some, too.

In my IJN Game against the AI, I have assembled the invasion forces for Port Moresby in Rabaul now. Luckily, one of my subs torpedoed the lady lex (two torpedoes hit). Well, it was killed by the destroyer escorts, but this should take that carrier out for a while.
its something like july the 27th now. I have not captured anything else yet. I stayed back until all the CV's arrived I can get (Kaga stayed at home, probably to protect the emperor or something like that. oh, well high command..).After taking port moresby, i will take the undefended Buna with a naval garrison. Milne Bay will be a slight problem since two landunits (probably Aussie Brigades) are stationed there. South seas detachment+ Yazawa Detachment should be able to take them out though. After that, on to Luganville , going for the sudden death victory. Quite anxious about what will happen next.

I agree that an early invasion of Noumea is a very risky business for the japanese. You will face at least three, maybe four or five allied CV's, at that time equipped with the newer wildcats. Although the american CV-Force will look ragged after that, they get some forces back, where as the japanese don't (not to mention that the battle takes place close to your base, the jap CV's that are heavily damaged probably won't make it back to Shortland, Rabaul or Truk).

Sven

I agree with you 100%
I started 4 scen 17 PBEM pbem games and took the offensive as the allies,
I took PM and also lunga .
It took a long time for the japanese to take these back, a stalling action
that is causing two games to go the distance (no auto victory for japs)
I am losing very badly in another game as the japanese player is
far more experienced than me and I am in a death match for rockhampton.
1 game ended as the japanese player lost too much material
strength to go on.
As a rookie that started those games I feel I did rather well and gained
far more experience in doing so.
I have started another game and took a defensive slow buildup approach
and can't say I like this approach as the japanese subs are slowly gaining
ground on my shipping and I am getting kinda boxed in.
Just my two cents worth.

Yeah, us human players are funny people. While the AI tends to just be stupid, we're creative and prone to making all kinds of mistakes that can be exploited.

I was having a grand time in my first PBEM game, playing sc. 17 as the Allies, and in the first big knock-down drag-out CV battle, I forgot to take my fighters off lock down and put them back on CAP-escort.

So much for ever having a perfect won-lost record.

ORIGINAL: pasternakski
I was having a grand time in my first PBEM game, playing sc. 17 as the Allies, and in the first big knock-down drag-out CV battle, I forgot to take my fighters off lock down and put them back on CAP-escort.

Ouch...
[X(]

Well, my AAR. So much for the KB. Although I came out on top in the carrierbattle, loosing one against sinking three allied CV's (only Saratoga is left), My CV'S got badly mauled too. Had to sent three back for repairs.
The real surprise came up when my forces landed at PM. Just about every Soldier available to SWPAC at that time was hanging around in PM. two Australian Divisions with a multitude of Base forces etc. My two divisions weren't enough. I had to ship in EVERY major LCU available meaning that about 90% of my Ground Combat strength are hanging around in PM now. The Airfield at PM was also put back to action rather quickly after having been taken out by my Bombardment TF. Was able to sink some of his transports though.
What I have now is the attrition battle the Japanese cannot hope to win.
I will try another approach in my next game.
[:@]

More and more I'm coming to the belief that PM is just not worth devoting a lot of resources to capturing early on for the Japanese player. It's a resource drain, both in capturing it and in holding it and keeping it supplied. It's also merely an annoyance to you if the Allies have it early on, and it of course forces them to supply it, which invites units up north for you to target from Buna and other places. I'd rather devote my efforts to Lunga and points south, and gobble up PM when pressure in other parts of the theater forces the allies to divert resources there.

ORIGINAL: redman1

More and more I'm coming to the belief that PM is just not worth devoting a lot of resources to capturing early on for the Japanese player. It's a resource drain, both in capturing it and in holding it and keeping it supplied. It's also merely an annoyance to you if the Allies have it early on, and it of course forces them to supply it, which invites units up north for you to target from Buna and other places. I'd rather devote my efforts to Lunga and points south, and gobble up PM when pressure in other parts of the theater forces the allies to divert resources there.

Diagree completely with you on this. If the Allies control PM, then you will have no secure base south of Truk, and Truk is too far away from witch to respond to Allied moves. Every one of the IJN bases is within range of B17s flying from PM or Luganville/Wanpuko. Taking PM is the highest IJN priority in the early months of the long campaigns. If you wait till you get around to it later, the invasion becomes very iffy, once the Allied LBA builds up.

I concur bilbow - B-17s, once up to strength, will really ruin your day as the IJN. They'll decimate any supply you have at any forward bases... I think the IJN must capture, then lightly garrison PM - make the Allies pay to get it back.

As the Allies, I never heavily garrison PM unless I'm playing the AI. A decent PBEM opponent will always get PM with the 2nd and 38th Divs. I make the IJN fight for it, but try to preserve my forces - the air units especially. The idea is to bloody his nose, let him have PM, then shut the door and pound away with LBA...

In scens. #17 and #19 against a competent Japanese opponent, you will not be ablel to hold PM. With four to six BBs the Japanese will be able to close PM with bombardment attacks. It would come down to a carrier battle-generally when the Allies only have four carriers and have not replaced their compliments of devestators with avengers. At this stage, the Allies have to hope for a lucky carrier battle fight-where the odds do not favor them. It is an old gambling adage that you do not gamble more than you can afford to lose, and if the allied player loses 4 carriers in June of 1942, then the Japanese will march to PM and follow that up with a march down the Solomons chain.

That said, it is still worth fighting for PM to a point. Make the Japanese mount a major effort to take it. Your LBA and subs will sink some ships. Perhaps you might sneak a raiding surface force in as well. The goal is to attrit the Japanese and cause ship damage. You will eventually lose PM, but forcing the Japanese to fight for it will upset the Japanese timetable. Much of the Japanese infantry will need to go back to Truk for rest before the Japanese can mount a serious drive down the Solomons.

As the Americans, I do not risk my carriers in a major engagment with Japanese carriers until I have all six and until there are full compliments of avengers and F4Fs on all of them. "Fighting with devestators is like fighting with wooden rifles." The Japanese have to attack and are stronger. It is foolish to risk you carriers in action so far from a safe base. In my book, that means the PM is expendable.

ORIGINAL: crsutton
It is foolish to risk you carriers in action so far from a safe base. In my book, that means the PM is expendable.

Well that is a general axiom of war. Is winning the battle going to cost you more than losing it?

To paraphrase Sun Tzu, there are two conditions to fighting a battle:
1. You need to fight it
2. You can win it.

If you can win a battle, but you don't need to (i.e. victory will not really have any positive impact on the greater strategy), then to engage in that conflict is a waste of your resources, and while victory may have no positive impact, it might have an impact (won the battle, lost the war).

Similarly, if you need to win it, but cannot, well... then you are screwed.

So you fight battles that mean something to the greater strategy. Particularly in UV where your resources are limited, and unnecessary risks can cost you the entire campaign.

In the case of Port Morseby it basically means you do not fight for it... per se. Instead what you want to do is put adequate resources into it that means the IJN should consider whether they need to take it. If the IJN really want it, they can have it, to adequtely defend it to stop them would mean that Townsville, Brisbane, and Noumea would be left vulnerable, and that is unacceptable (to paraphrase a book, these are 'Bases Which Must Be Defended').

Instead, what you want to do is make it so that either they take it, and spend enough resources doing it that you will have success in the greater operation, or they leave it alone, in which case you make sure it is a serious thorn in their side. In either case, the resources you devote to it are either ones you can extract quickly if/ when things go south, or are expendable.

This is not even remotely unknown in military history. In fact largely that is the purpose of fortifications in modern war. A fort cannot hold against modern weapons, if you want to reduce it, you will. But the problem is, you will have to pay for it in men, material, and time, probably more than it is worth (unless you use a nuke of course, but that is a different issue). But if you don't, it will be a base of operations from which you will be at least harrassed, and at worst flanked or entrapped.

Ive managed to do it several times, even in scen 19, but only by gambling and being set to have fairly heavy losses, it all depends on who I am playing against

ORIGINAL: sven6345789

Is there any chance for the allies to hold port moresby against a human opponent who decides to make that base his main objective (like using 2nd and 38th Division to go in including all carriers available at that time)?


Sven

bilbow
Matrix Hero




Posts: 290
Joined: 8/22/2002
From: Columbus OH
Status: online RE: Port Moresby (in reply to redman1)




quote:

ORIGINAL: redman1

More and more I'm coming to the belief that PM is just not worth devoting a lot of resources to capturing early on for the Japanese player. It's a resource drain, both in capturing it and in holding it and keeping it supplied. It's also merely an annoyance to you if the Allies have it early on, and it of course forces them to supply it, which invites units up north for you to target from Buna and other places. I'd rather devote my efforts to Lunga and points south, and gobble up PM when pressure in other parts of the theater forces the allies to divert resources there.


Diagree completely with you on this. If the Allies control PM, then you will have no secure base south of Truk, and Truk is too far away from witch to respond to Allied moves. Every one of the IJN bases is within range of B17s flying from PM or Luganville/Wanpuko. Taking PM is the highest IJN priority in the early months of the long campaigns. If you wait till you get around to it later, the invasion becomes very iffy, once the Allied LBA builds up.

3/16/2004 5:59:13 AM Report Abuse | ID: 571687

ORIGINAL: DoomedMantis

Ive managed to do it several times, even in scen 19, but only by gambling and being set to have fairly heavy losses, it all depends on who I am playing against

Agree with DM here. I't's possible for the allies to hold PM by moving most of the Aussies to PM and being prepared to fight a carrier battle. If you win the carrier battle the IJN will have to disengage, leaving you with PM and Oz secure. Of course if you lose the carrier battle, get your beach defenses in Townsville ready. Very risky since at this point the IJN carriers are better, but if you win it you will more than likely win the game.

Hi all,

ORIGINAL: sven6345789

Is there any chance for the allies to hold port moresby against a human opponent who decides to make that base his main objective (like using 2nd and 38th Division to go in including all carriers available at that time)?

Sven

IMHO, in Scen#19 against good human opponent there is _NO_ chance of holding Port Moresby (and many other bases as well).

In fact holding Port Moresby (and committing forces there) and then loosing it is almost sure way to loose campaign game very very quickly!

Most of very good and experienced PBEM players evacuate almost everything except few crucial bases when they play as Allies...


Leo "Apollo11"

You need both skill and luck - the latter is usually dependent on the first [;)]

I've been able to hold PM in a scen 17 against a few very able players. As mentioned
earlier, it all depends on how the cv battles in the Coral Sea goes.

Can't really said that I've even tried to hold it in scen 19. Putting in resources here means
opening other doors that very well might stay open until 1/1-43 [:'(]

Which generally means that unless you are a gambler, or very good, you don't want to put too many resources into PM.

I still don't think you want to abandon it and make it so the Japanese can try to stroll in unopposed (if they want it, make them pay for it), but don't pour troops and aircraft and ships into its defense.

Unless you are a gambler, and/ or can force a decisive battle here on your terms.

I think scenario 17 is probably doable (it was historically after all), but scenario 19 is another matter.

I'll get to find out right away myself!

I like all this fighting talk [:D] But seriously holding PM and taking on the IJN at the height of their powers? [X(] ? I'm impressed [&o]

Yes there is a gap when the US fighters upgrade and the extra IJN CVs have not arrived in late May. But who is going to attack PM during that window? It's either before or after. As the allies you can certainly try a Coral Sea before your fighters upgrade (any IJN player is likely to take you on) or fight a bigger CV battle in late June/July when the IJN has 6+ CVs and you have less, no AA upgrades and few if any Avengers (so your short range Devestators sit it out). Good luck [;)] Why fight the most important battle when the enemy holds all the cards?

Quite frankly if you lose that CV battle badly you have all but lost the game. CVs lost later on (by either side) may not decide the game but losing that credible threat early can be disaterous. LBA just isn't strong enough to make up for it in July. With PM stuffed with troops Australia is vulnerable. Once you are well behind in CVs troop transfers between New Caladonia and Australia are suicidal. Or between PM and Australia. Especially in scenario 19 the Japanese can land a lot of troops in summer '42. If you cannot get the 50% to stop them in Oz you are dead as he will take Brisbane and then you have lost half your land reinforcements. The Australian bases are too far apart to mutually support each other with fighter cover and are just a single big CV raid or large bombardment TF strike from closure.

I hate to put a downer on all this fighting talk but PM is a dangerous lure for the unwary allies. It is something the IJN really wants because if you have it he may lose quickly. But it has little value to the allies in mid '42. Even if you bluff him or drive him off supplying it is a nightmare until your air and sea power have grown. Even a wounded IJN can mount reasonably safe bombardment and night bombing raids. Supplies will be hard to keep. The IJN has to keep hitting it or it's game over. It's isolated nature makes it hard for Japan to defend later too. You will return [:)]