Small Scen VS AI

[tarkalak]

Mar 14, 1942

Sittang Bridge falls. Could I have taken it faster?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Sittang Bridge (56,54)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 18738 troops, 159 guns, 10 vehicles, Assault Value = 523

Defending force 14660 troops, 157 guns, 148 vehicles, Assault Value = 285

Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 0

Japanese adjusted assault: 910

Allied adjusted defense: 289

Japanese assault odds: 3 to 1 (fort level 0)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Sittang Bridge !!!

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), experience(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
979 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 138 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Guns lost 11 (1 destroyed, 10 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
3775 casualties reported
Squads: 145 destroyed, 12 disabled
Non Combat: 161 destroyed, 35 disabled
Engineers: 53 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 61 (58 destroyed, 3 disabled)
Vehicles lost 119 (118 destroyed, 1 disabled)
Units retreated 13

Defeated Allied Units Retreating!

Assaulting units:
215th Infantry Regiment
214th Infantry Regiment
112th Infantry Regiment
143rd Infantry Regiment
33rd Engineer Regiment
55th Mountain Gun Regiment
55th Division
33rd Mountain Gun Regiment
21st Medium Field Artillery Battalion

Defending units:
48th Gurkha Brigade
1st Burma Brigade
2nd Burma Brigade
13th Indian Brigade
16th Indian Brigade
46th Indian Brigade
3rd Burma Rifles Battalion
56th Madras Coy
1st Burma Div
11th Burma Rifles Battalion
6th Burma Rifles Battalion
27th Indian Mountain Gun Regiment
17th Indian Div

[tarkalak]

ORIGINAL: tarkalak
.

Accidental self quote instead of edit.

[tarkalak]

... Accidental post. I wanted to copy something only. [:(]

[GetAssista]

ORIGINAL: tarkalak

... Accidental post. I wanted to copy something only. [:(]

Accidental comment on your post [:)]

[tarkalak]

[:D]

My old hard drive had an almost complete failure last year. "Almost complete" meaning that windows fails to start but I can still access files in the hard drive.

Eventually I will accidentally figure out how to reinstall the game on my new Ubuntu and continue this.

It is on my "eventually-some-day" list. Highest priority.[8D]

[Technopiper]

I'm new to this game and just starting to play this scenario. Just want to let you know how helpful this thread has been for me. Thank you and keep posting! [;)]

[RangerJoe]

Eventually I will accidentally figure out how to reinstall the game on my new Ubuntu and continue this.

You have several options that I can think of right away and I am sure that others can think of more and possibly better ones.

1. Consider a Virtual Machine application running Windows on your Linux machine.
2. Get a Windows emulator software program on your Linux machine to run your Windows programs.
3. Install Windows on your Linux machine and use a dual boot.
4. Get a new hard drive for your older machine and if you can get the Windows key code from your old one, then reinstall Windows.
5. Get a "new" older machine from someone/somewhere that no longer needs it and have Windows installed just to run the Windows programs that you still want to use. If you get one from a pawn shop, get all of the key codes for all of the programs on the hard drive and then wipe the system, it is probably infected with viruses, trojans, worms, and the like.


The older hard drive failing means that all of it will eventually fail and/or become unreadable.

[tarkalak]

Thanks for the tips.

I misspoke about the new Ubuntu, I only changed the drive and installed. I tend to replace broken parts and keep machines until they fail completely.

I tried simply installing with wine, but the game crashes. Also tried the Play on Linux from Lowpe's thread in the Tech forum.

Then I bought XCOM 2 with Long War mod and haven't finished it yet. [8D]

I will eventually go back to WITPAE and figure out how to run it again.

[tarkalak]

ORIGINAL: Technopiper

I'm new to this game and just starting to play this scenario. Just want to let you know how helpful this thread has been for me. Thank you and keep posting! [;)]

You are welcome. [:)]

It is the only one, that I know of, that focuses on the ground war.

Each of the small scenarios is a good teaching tool for different aspects.
1. Burma teaches the ground war
2. Coral sea - carrier OPs
3. 1000 miles - Invasions (allied) and how to crush poorly protected convoys (Jap) [:D]
4. Buccaneer - Invasions again.

[Technopiper]

ORIGINAL: tarkalak

ORIGINAL: Technopiper

I'm new to this game and just starting to play this scenario. Just want to let you know how helpful this thread has been for me. Thank you and keep posting! [;)]

You are welcome. [:)]

It is the only one, that I know of, that focuses on the ground war.

Each of the small scenarios is a good teaching tool for different aspects.
1. Burma teaches the ground war
2. Coral sea - carrier OPs
3. 1000 miles - Invasions (allied) and how to crush poorly protected convoys (Jap) [:D]
4. Buccaneer - Invasions again.

You know it was frustrating to see you take Sittang Bridge as the Japanese. I played as Japanese and got crushed at Sittang Bridge. [&o] I must be doing something wrong. Nevertheless I am still reloading my saves to try again. Taking it real slow, like 3-4 turns per day while reading everything I can lay my hands on the campaign. This is a game you learn by repeatedly retracing your steps to see how the things work. [:D]

[RangerJoe]

I misspoke about the new Ubuntu, I only changed the drive and installed. I tend to replace broken parts and keep machines until they fail completely.

Then dual boot with a separate partition for your programs and data. That way, if an OS gets messed up and you have to reinstall, only the OS partition is affected.

[Technopiper]

I finally took Sittang Bridge! What I did differently is that I merged 12 battalions into their parent regiments (4 in all). Is that a big factor or am I imagining things? What do you think?

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Feb 18, 42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Sittang Bridge (56,54)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 23475 troops, 163 guns, 16 vehicles, Assault Value = 620

Defending force 12639 troops, 134 guns, 115 vehicles, Assault Value = 157

Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 0

Japanese adjusted assault: 281

Allied adjusted defense: 107

Japanese assault odds: 2 to 1 (fort level 0)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Sittang Bridge !!!

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), preparation(-), experience(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
440 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 34 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 10 disabled

Allied ground losses:
3498 casualties reported
Squads: 179 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 165 destroyed, 9 disabled
Engineers: 56 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 85 (85 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Vehicles lost 85 (84 destroyed, 1 disabled)
Units retreated 9
Units destroyed 2

Defeated Allied Units Retreating!

Assaulting units:
143rd Infantry Regiment
20th Ind. Engineer Regiment
55th Cavalry Regiment
112th Infantry Regiment
55th Engineer Regiment
214th Infantry Regiment
4th Ind. Engineer Regiment
215th Infantry Regiment
33rd Engineer Regiment
55th Mountain Gun Regiment
33rd Mountain Gun Regiment

Defending units:
2nd Burma Brigade
16th Indian Brigade
13th Indian Brigade
1st Burma Brigade
48th Gurkha Brigade
46th Indian Brigade
6th Burma Rifles Battalion
27th Indian Mountain Gun Regiment
11th Burma Rifles Battalion
1st Burma Div
17th Indian Div

[Bif1961]

Merging components into the larger parent unit gives them more support to conduct operations, especially attacks, also you might want to look at the Commander's skills of the combined unit as he might be better then your separate smaller unit commanders were.

[Technopiper]

ORIGINAL: Bif1961

Merging components into the larger parent unit gives them more support to conduct operations, especially attacks, also you might want to look at the Commander's skills of the combined unit as he might be better then your separate smaller unit commanders were.

What about air force squadrons? Would it be a good idea to merge fighter squadrons?

[Bif1961]

Depends what you need them for if you only have 1 squadron but need it to do multiple things like night CAP, Day CAP and escort with the same squadron then split it. If it is a search squadron it might be a benefit to split it up to cover from more bases. So it all depends on your needs at the time. However, I am sure they fight better combined in their original squadron with everything else being equal.

[RangerJoe]

When you split up air units, the B and C sections may not have that good of a leader.

[Technopiper]

Thanks for the answers guys. Learning bit by bit as I play.[&o]

[tarkalak]

ORIGINAL: Technopiper

ORIGINAL: Bif1961

Merging components into the larger parent unit gives them more support to conduct operations, especially attacks, also you might want to look at the Commander's skills of the combined unit as he might be better then your separate smaller unit commanders were.

What about air force squadrons? Would it be a good idea to merge fighter squadrons?

In general: Yes. You can always split them later.
In this scenario: ... it is complicated.

You have three Sentais of fighters each made of 42 planes combined. I will call them 1st, 2nd and 3rd Sentai, because I don't remember the actual names.

1st Sentai is divided in three
core group - 14 Nates; can upgrade to Oscar Ia
.II group - 14 Nates; can upgrade to Oscar Ia
.III group - 14 Nates; can upgrade to Oscar Ia

2st Sentai is divided in three
core group - 14 Oscar Ib; can't upgrade
.II group - 14 Nates; can upgrade to Oscar Ib
.III group - 14 Nates; can upgrade to Oscar Ib

3st Sentai is divided in three
core group - 14 Nates; can upgrade to Oscar Ic
.II group - 14 Nates; can upgrade to Oscar Ia
.III group - 14 Nates; can upgrade to Oscar Ia

For replacements you have some numbers in the pool but your production is:
Nates - many, I don't remember it , but there were enough.
Oscar Ia - 12 per month
Oscar Ib - 12 per month
Oscar Ic - 5 per month

All of them have no armor and die fast.

3rd Sentai has a weird dilemma:
1. If you combine it right away and upgrade them to Oscar Ic you will never have enough Oscars to fill it.

2. If you upgrade the core group alone you cannot combine it with the others later.

3. You can also combine one group with the core and upgrade. You will have 3rd Sentai as 24 plane group with Oscar Ic and a detachment of 14 Nate/Oscar Ia planes.

The other two Sentais don't have the same dilemma, but you don't have enough planes to keep them full.

Ideally you want the Oscars to Sweep/CAP, while the Nates train pilots and immolate themselves as Escorts when you need them to.

The allies on the other hand have little to no replacements for their planes, but theirs are tougher to kill.

Edit: typos.

[Bif1961]

Always more things to consider when you make one decision it cascades into other issues.

[RangerJoe]

A suggestion, use thee Nates for LRCAP on the enemy airfields at a low percentage level. This will increase his ops losses. If you say there are little to no replacements and Nates aren't good offensively, then that is a good option. Nates can also be good for CAP as the are maneuverable and the escorts are at a disadvantage. Even if the Nates don't shoot down too many bombers, they can damage them which increases the chance for an ops loss as well as spoil their aim. It is probably very hard to concentrate when a bullet whizzes by your ear . . .