Brainstorming: What's the best way to kill the Japanese Fleet?

[bugoo]

The biggest problem with sinking that fleet is the large defensive power of it, combined with if it takes you too long to sink it there factories are already running so its pointless.  You truly have 2 options.  1) build up to hopefully slow down japan as they match you in builds or 2) take back the south pacific, to hell with there fleet.  If you really think about it there fleet is a defensive monster, but not that great on the attack, use that to your advantage to take islands.  Subs and carriers are great for this as the subs keep them away and the carriers defend against the strafe.  A transport is the deadliest weapon in the pacific, use it.

[wodan46]

@a44bigdog:

I offered to play him a game here on the forums to test some of these so called strategies. Haven’t heard an answer back.

I told you that I am unwilling to play on the forums, it would require excessive typing.  I have had a strained arm limiting my ability to do things for about a month now, and am not willing to strain it even worse when I should be resting it.

I am willing to play it on TripleA, but do not know how to do PBEM with it.

@a44bigdog:

And what US fleet is going to sink At a minimum a loaded carrier a cruiser and a battleship in seazone 39 off of Australia on US 2. Although Normally I like to have 2 CVs there so it would take an even bigger fleet.

If the fleet is in sea zone 39, it can’t.  If in sea zone 37, it can be hit with 4 Fighters and 3 Bombers.  If America wished to, it could hit Sea Zone 39 with 1 Carrier, 1 Destroyer, 4 Fighters, and 2 Bombers, but doing so would be difficult, and would be suicide depending on where the Japanese Fleet is.

@a44bigdog:

Australia is best grabbed by Japan when they are out and about in the Pacific. It is hard for the Allies to liberate as well. An India IC is no REAL threat to Japan. Japan can produce 8 units, Manchuria 3, Kiangsu or FIC 2,  all that compared to India’s 3?

True.  However, if Japan does that on J2, they WILL be losing Manchuria and Burma, whereupon they will rapidly lose their factories on the mainland.  Things won’t go too well for them then, even if Manchuria is useless to the allies.

@a44bigdog:

wodan46 you do good as far as thinking outside of the box. That can be a good thing. However without testing one can never know the value of ones ideas. And then when active players point out obvious flaws in your strategies you rarely adapt to them just offer up more unrealistic situations.

I analyzed the situation and see the nature of the attack.  Still think it involves good prediction of the actions of the Allies and involves sacrificing East Asia, if only temporarily.

[atarihuana]

yes and because of exessive typing u write long posts justifying yourself :D

[LuckyDay]

@wodan46:

@LuckyDay:

Is this because 2 FIG from SZ 61 sunk the DD/TRN on J1 (99% win), as well as Borneo and E Indies falling.

That is a given.  I assume that the Axis sinks as much fleet as possible, which means that Egypt and Karelia can’t be taken first turn.

who cares about Egypt and Karelia 1st turn in terms of how does this affect Japan/Pacific actions…  First off, how do 4 Jap fighters affect Karelia?  I’ll give you benefit of the doubt and assume you meant some other territory.  Secondly, take Egypt turn 2. 
my point is that there is no Allied ships off India to help protect your turn 2 UK builds there.

@LuckyDay:

Then on J2, Australia was lost as well as the 4 FIG in FIC sinking the CV/BB/TRN off India while not building any ground troops to protect the IC?

4 Fighters vs. CV/BB will end with all 4 Fighters dead, and the CV/BB still alive.  You have a spare Fighter in India anyways most likely.

4 FIG vs CV/BB is 28% chance 3 fighters left, 68% 2 fighters left.  ran it 10,000 times. 
If you moved a fighter to India it didn’t land on the Carrier, but in India, that won’t affect the sea battle.  Not that it matters, since you were so concerned about not taking Egypt, that fighter you would have most likely left there to defend.

[LuckyDay]

@wodan46:

I told you that I am unwilling to play on the forums, it would require excessive typing.  I have had a strained arm limiting my ability to do things for about a month now, and am not willing to strain it even worse when I should be resting it.

@atarihuana:

yes and because of exessive typing u write long posts justifying yourself :D

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Wodan,
you’ve only been posting on the forum since Feb. 4, 2009 and you have 170+ posts and you are worried about excessive typing?

[LuckyDay]

@wodan46:

@a44bigdog:

Australia is best grabbed by Japan when they are out and about in the Pacific. It is hard for the Allies to liberate as well. An India IC is no REAL threat to Japan. Japan can produce 8 units, Manchuria 3, Kiangsu or FIC 2,  all that compared to India’s 3?

True.  However, if Japan does that on J2, they WILL be losing Manchuria and Burma, whereupon they will rapidly lose their factories on the mainland.  Things won’t go too well for them then, even if Manchuria is useless to the allies.

Japan doesn’t even start with Burma, so if they don’t take it, but take Yunnan J1, how can UK or even China take it back?  And since you are spending all your UK money on the IC UK1 and boats UK2, you don’t have any extra UK forces there (or Russian) to help take Burma or FIC

As for Manchuria, moving troops towards Australia doesn’t mean you can’t move stuff to Manchuria, or heck one could even build an IC there and build.

You grossly overestimate the Allies power early on in Asia.  Russia is defensive, China is infantry and you aren’t building any ground units for UK.

[LuckyDay]

@wodan46:

@a44bigdog:

wodan46 you do good as far as thinking outside of the box. That can be a good thing. However without testing one can never know the value of ones ideas. And then when active players point out obvious flaws in your strategies you rarely adapt to them just offer up more unrealistic situations.

I analyzed the situation and see the nature of the attack.  Still think it involves good prediction of the actions of the Allies and involves sacrificing East Asia, if only temporarily.

run the numbers, you aren’t predicting well.  You even contradict yourself–above you are sacrificing E Asia, but below you apparently are advancing.

@wodan46:

True.  However, if Japan does that on J2, they WILL be losing Manchuria and Burma, whereupon they will rapidly lose their factories on the mainland.

[wodan46]

@LuckyDay:

Wodan,
you’ve only been posting on the forum since Feb. 4, 2009 and you have 170+ posts and you are worried about excessive typing?

The Play by Post games involve a lot more typing, and under a time constraint.  I honestly shouldn’t be typing much at all, but its the least straining activity I can do that I actually enjoy.

[wodan46]

@LuckyDay:

@wodan46:

@a44bigdog:

wodan46 you do good as far as thinking outside of the box. That can be a good thing. However without testing one can never know the value of ones ideas. And then when active players point out obvious flaws in your strategies you rarely adapt to them just offer up more unrealistic situations.

I analyzed the situation and see the nature of the attack.  Still think it involves good prediction of the actions of the Allies and involves sacrificing East Asia, if only temporarily.

run the numbers, you aren’t predicting well.  You even contradict yourself–above you are sacrificing E Asia, but below you apparently are advancing.

@wodan46:

True.  However, if Japan does that on J2, they WILL be losing Manchuria and Burma, whereupon they will rapidly lose their factories on the mainland.

There is no contradiction.  Japan is the one sacrificing, the Allies are the ones advancing.

[TimTheEnchanter]

@wodan46:

@LuckyDay:

Wodan,
you’ve only been posting on the forum since Feb. 4, 2009 and you have 170+ posts and you are worried about excessive typing?

The Play by Post games involve a lot more typing, and under a time constraint.  I honestly shouldn’t be typing much at all, but its the least straining activity I can do that I actually enjoy.

I think there’s an AA50 version of TripleA out now.  Considerably less typing involved… Problem solved!

[Jennifer]

There is, but I believe it is in beta.

And I refuse to use it at all if they don’t fix it so that moving the mouse to the right scrolls the map to the right and moving the mouse to the left scrolls the map to the left.  Right now it’s bass ackwards.

[bongaroo]

@Cmdr:

There is, but I believe it is in beta.

And I refuse to use it at all if they don’t fix it so that moving the mouse to the right scrolls the map to the right and moving the mouse to the left scrolls the map to the left.  Right now it’s bass ackwards.

Same thing happened to me when going from one drafting software to another.  Perhaps we could ask for a selectable option?  Wouldn’t be very hard to program.

[Jennifer]

@bongaroo:

@Cmdr:

There is, but I believe it is in beta.

And I refuse to use it at all if they don’t fix it so that moving the mouse to the right scrolls the map to the right and moving the mouse to the left scrolls the map to the left.  Right now it’s bass ackwards.

Same thing happened to me when going from one drafting software to another.  Perhaps we could ask for a selectable option?  Wouldn’t be very hard to program.

that would be acceptable to me.  I just want the map to function (scrolling wise) like Battlemap and other utilities.  If you want to do that by putting a toggle switch in so it functions “normally” or so you can make it function “backwards” that would be fine.

Honestly, I think it was a programming error.  Someone reversed a couple of commands telling the program to move left instead of moving right and thus, we got this weird acting piece of software.

[bongaroo]

@Cmdr:

Honestly, I think it was a programming error.  Someone reversed a couple of commands telling the program to move left instead of moving right and thus, we got this weird acting piece of software.

Actually it’s quite common the way it is set up.  There is no set standard for how it should scroll in any programming conventions that I’ve ever been informed of.  I’m used to programs working as TripleA does and it takes me a second to adjust to BattleMap.  [shrug]

Very similar to how I need some video games to play.  I like the Y-Axis to be inverted.  It’s just comfortable to me since my background for this type of stuff is aviation.  Push forward on the stick and the nose goes down.  Some of my friends hate playing multiplayer games with me where we pass the controllers around since whoever gets mine will have to switch that setting.

This is neither here nor there as far as Japan fleet killing goes.  :D

[Jennifer]

Screwed up controls kept me away from flight sims too. :P

Make the control work like the steering wheel of a car, not some weird configuration, that way you reduce the learning curve of future users and broaden your user base.

[bongaroo]

@Cmdr:

Screwed up controls kept me away from flight sims too. :P

Make the control work like the steering wheel of a car, not some weird configuration, that way you reduce the learning curve of future users and broaden your user base.

Well as far as left and right go, a plane will act like a car.  Left on the stick and you roll left.  Now as far as the pitch of the nose, well cars don’t do that :D

I could be completely wrong but it may have something to do with how planes were built since we’ve been building them.  When they didn’t have hydralic or fly by wire controls and the pilot was exerting force to move the control surfaces.  I dunno.

[Jennifer]

Yea, planes are backwards up and down, imho.  TripleA is backwards left and right.

[LuckyDay]

@wodan46:

@LuckyDay:

@wodan46:

@a44bigdog:

wodan46 you do good as far as thinking outside of the box. That can be a good thing. However without testing one can never know the value of ones ideas. And then when active players point out obvious flaws in your strategies you rarely adapt to them just offer up more unrealistic situations.

I analyzed the situation and see the nature of the attack.  Still think it involves good prediction of the actions of the Allies and involves sacrificing East Asia, if only temporarily.

run the numbers, you aren’t predicting well.  You even contradict yourself–above you are sacrificing E Asia, but below you apparently are advancing.

@wodan46:

True.  However, if Japan does that on J2, they WILL be losing Manchuria and Burma, whereupon they will rapidly lose their factories on the mainland.

There is no contradiction.  Japan is the one sacrificing, the Allies are the ones advancing.

Remember, you were the one taking the Allied position of what to do, so sacrifice would be on their side, because your goal is to win as the Allies, not Japan.  So when you said that the Japanese would loose Burma and Manchuria on turn 3 it was quite the opposite of when you said that the Allies would have to sacrifice East Asia.  To avoid more unnecessary typing, I’ll leave at that.

None the less, your Indian fleet, as well as India & Australia and the southern islands mentioned will fall LONG before a US fleet would arrive, if ever.
Indian Fleet falls to fighters, India falls to ground forces, planes and naval actions after taking Australia.  Islands fall to transports on J1.  US begins building fleet, but by the time your bombers come in to play on A3 Japan is already out of their range and they cannot land in the Pacific unless the fleet first takes staging grounds, which Japan can repel because you haven’t build anything to make them change their plans in the first 3 rounds.

[LuckyDay]

@wodan46:

The Play by Post games involve a lot more typing, and under a time constraint.  I honestly shouldn’t be typing much at all, but its the least straining activity I can do that I actually enjoy.

Here’s a thought.  Your strategies all give the Allies the win in short order by quickly eliminating one of the Axis countries.  One would think this would actually help cut down on the amount of typing needing to be done.  As for time constraints- they can be set by the participants.  And since typing is the least straining activity…?  less straining than seeing your plan go down in flames?

[atarihuana]

forum newbie 1
–-------------

purchase

1 troll shield

combat move

discussion section to PBF

• 1 troll hammer

dice

1 troll hammer
Rolls: 1@5; Total Hits: 11@5: (1)

wodan strat
Rolls: 1@1; Total Hits: 01@1: (6)