1.11 -- Buggy, but trying harder.

[Pang Bingxun]

I did have about 48 INT earlier, but disbanded most for better range FTR. Those and the 12 STR took China from 137ic to 49ic in just 5 weeks. It reached zero IC perhaps a week or two later. This resulted in massive "low on supply" modifier in all ground battles. Unfortunately, several hundred rockets will never achieve that because - unlike bombers that can be directed at only industrial damage - the rockets are "strategic generalists" and IC damage is just a small part of the overall damage they spend their force on. While you will certainly get a major effect given how many you have, unless you get the IC low enough, the AI repairs it quickly.

I sense that you underestimate the effect. You got a reduction of 64.23% in 5 weeks with Str1943. It has strategic attack 20, the V2A9 has 80. That is still only half of a ICBM, but quite something. More importantly the rockets cannot be stopped or just reduced in their effectiveness. So their is a chance that they do more damage in say 5 hours than you did in 5 weeks. But at this point that is just speculation.

And all those partisans in Portugal territory over two provinces away from my frontline could still affect things for me?

It is not impossible. Partisans reduce the flow of ESE through their province. If however you are talking about provinces that donnot matter for your ESE at a given set of provinces deemed important, than you can ignore it.

The obvious fact is that partisans do decrease ESE even if there is no tc-overload. Where they decrease ESE to which degree is a bit complicated. My formulation "Partisans reduce the flow of ESE through their province" should capture the essense of it.

 

[Commander666]

I sense that you underestimate the effect. Str1943. It has strategic attack 20, the V2A9 has 80.

I don't think so but base it on experience having tried to achieve with rockets (but couldn't) what I always can achieve with STR. Yes, V2-2 (what you call V2A9 and MJF calls V3 which is my favorite term also) do have strategic attack of 80... and about 1/10 of that is directed at industry. The remainder is addressed at 4 different resources, infrastructure, airports, naval bases, AA, radar, nuclear test site, rocket test site, and conversion plants.

However, bombers can be missioned to address 100% of their bomb load at industry. And - given MJF's late circa to attack China, he could actually be using STR-4 (1945 Turbojet) cause that is what I have right now. They have a strategic value of 30. And as they do operate in stacks of four - that is 120 attack on industry only, versus 8-10 for the damage to the industry using a "generalist" rocket.

And why do I compare 4 bombers versus 1 rocket? Well one needs to see what the damage is to know how many rockets to fire, right? Or would you just fire 4 rockets at every target on first day?

And while 200 rockets might seem a huge arsenal, 12 STR - if we count 1 STR compared to 1 rocket - then in just 200/12 = 17 days of bombing the bombers have done as many sorties as 200 rockets.

And if 4 STR can't do the job completely in 17 days (it took me 5 weeks, IIRC to zero RoC's IC given the many mountains) then the rockets have a real problem because it takes time to build another hundred.

The only factor in favor of "rocket man" is they can't be stopped. However, having the many FTR that I used and expert tactics, my bombers also could not be stopped.

So their is a chance that they do more damage in say 5 hours than you did in 5 weeks. But at this point that is just speculation.

If you fired the whole lot in 5 hours you would be firing "blind". That might result in rockets hitting what didn't need any more rockets. Or it might result in the rockets not being targeted at the best locations. But however fired, 200 "V3s" will not do anywhere close to the damage that STR-3 (1943) will do in 5 weeks of bombing provided player is careful and maintains good air dominance. In 5 weeks not once was one of my bombers attacked, IIRC. And China had over 20 INTs, some very modern.

Anyway, it is supposed to be a comparison game, so MJF has the perfect opportunity to show us what is possible with however many rockets. At least he has the manpower to build a few hundred.

EDIT: To clarify, all I discussed was in relation to reaching zero IC when China starts with 137. But the remaining ROC in MJF's game is tiny. So he probably can zero that. But I am quite sure 200 V2-2 rockets will not zero 137 IC. That might be ROC, Manchuria, Mengkukuo and Siam combined in MJF's game.

 

[bosman]

In some cases rockets are more valuable, than it seems on first impression. If you are about to target provinces with heavy AA defence, then rockets come handy - at least on first strike. Even, if you have air superiority, but an enemy is also quite strong, your losses might be surprisingly high and in case of fighting Japan it is notably visible if, of course, they have lots AA.

 

[Pang Bingxun]

do have strategic attack of 80... and about 1/10 of that is directed at industry.

1/10? Are you sure about this quantification? I assumed something much less extreme.

And why do I compare 4 bombers versus 1 rocket? Well one needs to see what the damage is to know how many rockets to fire, right? Or would you just fire 4 rockets at every target on first day?

Possibly. Well, i would weight, so it is of course not the same amount of rockets on every target. Tokio with a base ic of 70.47 and Fukuoka with a base ic of 20.75 make up more than 50% of all base ic, so they get the most rockets fired at them. Hell, the command limit may be a serios limit.

But that apart there is little reason to wait. The earlier the damage is done, the earlier it does become effective. With AA, air bases and tc in shatters the enemy airforce can still put up a fight, but this is a one time thing. It would take ages for it to regain org, so then the strategic bombers can perpetuate the damage done by the rockets.

The quite expensive to repair naval bases can also be an important target. Italy usually suffers from taking Athens because of the substantial icd it takes to repair the naval base.

 

[MJF]

They were not introduced until after the war in 1948. It is Reichsmarks that you are spending.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichsmark

Well, Yawohl!

 

[MJF]

Well, i would weight, so it is of course not the same amount of rockets on every target. Tokio with a base ic of 70.47 and Fukuoka with a base ic of 20.75 make up more than 50% of all base ic, so they get the most rockets fired at them. Hell, the command limit may be a serios limit.

But that apart there is little reason to wait. The earlier the damage is done, the earlier it does become effective. With AA, air bases and tc in shatters the enemy airforce can still put up a fight, but this is a one time thing. It would take ages for it to regain org, so then the strategic bombers can perpetuate the damage done by the rockets.

IIRC, 1 V2b takes out 1 factory. IDR how much infra each takes out.

 

[MJF]

So you are still friends with Japan. Will you do a sneak attack on Tokyo?

That's the plan, however no atom bomb can get there now, or before I conquer closer provinces.

As I had MCed Japan, I wanted to give Japan AI at least a year to reposition as it likes. Sadly, the repositioning has resulted in a fairly weak position and is exactly the same as it always is - one division on EVERY island province.

I don't take control of Japan.

It actually appears you do - if you have a line from Berlin to your province of Olekminsk in the east. With an air base there you might be able to place newly built V2-2 there. Their range of 2400km will easily reach. Olekminsk to Tokyo is only 1754 km..

Neither Olekminsk:

nor friendly Portugal's Macao:

give me the closeness I need to Nuke Tokyo. Nor does anything else.

However, as stated before, IC bombers are 1950 technology. Tech rushing very hard and including their build time, I doubt you would have them in 1948.

But 1945 Turbojet STR-4 with range of 1300 km should be no problem from a choice of several bases you or your friend Italy have - especially Hangzhou near Shanghai.

This is a consequence of not playing 1.11. The green is not Italy. It is China-Nanjing, which is actually stronger than ROC, but more spread out:

So my overall strategy is:

• wipe Japan and its puppets from the Asian continent (so I don't need to also manage fleets).
• then have a lengthy sub versus IJN CVs campaign meaning I can give that full concentration. My considerable CV fleets might, or might not, engage also. But I really want to get one screen with the subs getting the kudos.
• next start amphibing all the important places in the Pacific.
• Finally invade Japan starting with unloading the full nuclear arsenal on them first - delivered by bombers. My main objective is to have the smallest German MP losses possible as I am thinking that is an important victory condition..

• My plan is to advance from Pearl/Midway, and Noumea/Guadalcanal, much like the USA did in the actual war. Warzecha will command the CTF/Marine effort through the central islands to Tokyo, while Chester Nimitz and his American State CTF & landing troops will command the southern advance (which now must include at least feints against Japan-owned Australia).
• Rommel will command the attack from the North/Olekminsk, taking Vladivostok and Korea, thereby supporting Japanese Mainland attacks.
• From Irkutsk, Guderian will lead the move to Beiping/Shanghai. Manstein will lead the move south, winding towards Chongqing, and then support an Eastward attach. Model will watch the area between the two major Irkutsk attacks. He will be tasked with taking the nasty territory around Nanyang. All these commanders have an HQ unit, and 2 Panther Div's + 3-4 MOT div's
• Kurt Student will oversee various collections of Mountain troops moving through the nasty terrain from Burma to Chongqing, and Hanoi. A smaller force will move towards Singapore, but is insufficient to conquer it alone. Once the Japanese Mainland is in our hands, and the two Chinas are broken, the rest is just details.
• EDIT: Originally I was not going to take Lanzhou, a ROC VP, until Japan & C-N were conquered. I was afraid one of them would annex it, as they have before. I then realized that if I am at war with these other countries as well, then they can not do that!.
• I want the start screen to show only Germany & Italy -- the original cohorts in all this.

Since I can not Nuke Tokyo, I will have 150+ rockets by war's start. That oughta hurt.

It should all come down to how well we do vs the Japanese Navy and the two Chinese Armies -- and, can the Japanese air force hurt my amphibs of Honshu...?

AFAIK, that is not proven. I believe navy in port will destroy if province is nuked, but have yet to test it.

We may see.

 

[Commander666]

This is a consequence of not playing 1.11. The green is not Italy. It is China-Nanjing, which is actually stronger than ROC, but more spread out:

So true. But actually, we got China-Nanjing in v1.09 too - except I didn't let my enemy get it into their alliance. You will have fun. Is ROC allied with Japan? C-N is Japan's puppet, right?

I will have 150+ rockets, however. That oughta hurt.

So who gets the rockets? Is there a plan to get anybody down to zero IC?

I want the start screen to show only Germany & Italy -- the original cohorts in all this.

Like this - without Japan? If I remember, I'll change Japanese flag to Slovakia's because they were an "original cohort" for me. But I think I quite ahead of you in game time. Like to get the games closer. When do you think you will DOW Japan? I would like to do it same time as I will be doing land and ocean campaigns separately. So while I already have China conquered, I will probably lose my lead because of the separate pure navy versus navy phase I am planning before any amphibs start.

To clarify, I am ready to start anytime... just would like a couple months advance notice. We have main battle tanks now. Armored Cavalry too. They have stronger soft attack than Mech-3 and same soft attack as ARM-5. Wish I had more than only nine divisions of the CAV even if we have Mech-4 and ARM-6 by now.

On the other hand, if no DOW for another year, that is OK too. Still got lots of infra builds to finish, so am far from bored. Quite like the supply map mode becoming as green as my partisan map mode.

 

[MJF]

An interesting wrinkle has developed. First Iran, now this:

Left-Wing Coup, And after I dumped supplies and money and materials on them.

 

[Commander666]

I just lost all of yesterday's play. I did save... but the file isn't there when I started again today. Anyway, "Argentina", what can I say that I didn't say before? I greatly prefer staying in a state-of-war for stability of the alliance and able to fly aircraft to assist building up bases. How does one fit 60 FTR, 16 INT and untold TACS, CAS, STR, and NAVs into this small corner of Asia?

But as per earlier (maybe you mentioned it somewhere) but just like to get it clear. Are both ROC and C-N allied with Japan? I like to know if ROC has military access from C-N.

 

[Pang Bingxun]

How does one fit 60 FTR, 16 INT and untold TACS, CAS, STR, and NAVs into this small corner of Asia?

By building airbases. In 1.11 they are free of manpower.

 

[Pang Bingxun]

I did a little test with 1946 air doctrines and 1951 ICBMs. 4 of them them reduced the base ic of Tokyo from 70.473 to 35.92, the infra from 200% to 21.7% and the AA from 2.0 to zero. A second wave of 4 ICBMs did reduce base ic to 28.43 and infra to 1.3%. A third wave of only 2 ICBMs did reduce it to 25.67 base ic and 1% infra, but that is partly due to repairing having occured.

One bombing run by rockets takes 4 hours. So each wave should be timed to arrived 4 hours after the previous one. Maybe a bit more to be sure, but not much more either.

Air bases and naval bases were not effected by strategic bombardement.

In a second attempt i timed the 3 waves to start 5 hours apart, the results did not differ meaningfully.

IIRC, 1 V2b takes out 1 factory. IDR how much infra each takes out.

One ICBM takes out about 1 factory. So it would take 39 ICBMs or 78 V2A4b to destroy all 39 factories in Tokyo, possibly more due to repairs occuring. This is a bit disappointing.

Japan has 114 factories in its national provinces, 98 if you discount Korea.

The huge drop in base ic comes mainly from lowered infra and infra can be repaired fast and cheap.

 

[Commander666]

By building airbases.

Ha ha! I have now built well over 200 air bases in this game... and I am still having to work very hard at getting my Luftwaffe and Axis bombers to fit into Asia. I don't think the problem is with Asia... maybe its our massive air force.

In 1.11 they are free of manpower.

You made 1.11 much too easy for MJF to win.

 

[Commander666]

I did a little test with 1946 air doctrines and 1951 ICBMs.
One ICBM takes out about 1 factory..

That's great that you tested what MJF can't build before he annexes Japan in 1948. At least I will be annexing Japan in 1948. No ICBMs.

But you should find that many of the factories are far harder to reduce than the those sitting in Tokyo on plains terrain. Anyway, how does a V2-2 compare? That would be the applicable weapon, I believe?

 

[MJF]

IAre both ROC and C-N allied with Japan? I like to know if ROC has military access from C-N.

Yes. Both Japanese puppets.

They are doing atomic research.

I have 10 CV IV's, ~6 BB IV's or better via England & Brazil, and just now, 6 more new CV VIII's (Semi-Modern).

I'm going to have to pull a "Pang Naval Maneuver" and use the S-M CV's with 3 S-M CL VI's and 3 S-M DD VI's, as the S-M CA VI's (usually used as soaks) are 30 knots vs the CV VIII's 32 knots. Modern CA's - 1948.

EDIT: Turns out the CA VI's are speed 30 as well. WTF!!

EDIT: 10/7/1946. One more thing:

 

[Pang Bingxun]

That's great that you tested what MJF can't build before he annexes Japan in 1948. At least I will be annexing Japan in 1948. No ICBMs.

But you should find that many of the factories are far harder to reduce than the those sitting in Tokyo on plains terrain. Anyway, how does a V2-2 compare? That would be the applicable weapon, I believe?

It is strategic attack 80 vs. 160. This makes the math real simple.

 

[MJF]

You made 1.11 much too easy for MJF to win.

 

[Commander666]

Will you answer my questions or not?

 

[Commander666]

It is strategic attack 80 vs. 160. This makes the math real simple.

Actually the math is far more complex than your typical tests would indicate. Not only is the IC destruction from V2-2 only 1/2 of what you posted about ICBMs, but you have ignored other factors that result in less destruction:

• You tested for optimum results at Tokyo where there is massive factory concentration. Your test might be applicable to Chongqing which has high concentration also, but I doubt it is to places with lower factory numbers.
• Your test was against a Plains terrain. That is not applicable to most places in China. Mountains seriously degrade strategic destruction.
• Probably the greatest skew in your test is that it is devoid of the "human factor". It is EXTREMELY hard to fire off ~150 rockets while also maintaining records as needed to decide where to repeat firing at and where not. Basically, the player is required to inspect ALL of the target provinces in China every day (or as you suggested every 5 hours). That is nearly impossible given a war is also being conducted. I assure you that just having 3 stacks of STR bombers and the attention that needs (following only the destruction on ONE target as the bombers worked together on most targets) is already stretching human player capability when it needs to also manage all the other battles and missions. In fact, my earlier "UPDATE" report reflected on that "human dimension" but which your testing fails to include. The net result is not "This makes the math real simple" but that the math is really simple; and hardly applicable to any actual war results as regards a program of trying to zero a country's IC using rockets - especially when the country has the number of targets China has.

EDIT: And those targets are - in fact - quite difficult to find in China. We are not discussing the very much easier view of inspecting all of the provinces with factories (after every day's bombing) in the British Isles or on Honshu.

 

[Pang Bingxun]

Actually the math is far more complex than your typical tests would indicate. Not only is the IC destruction from V2-2 only 1/2 of what you posted about ICBMs, but you have ignored other factors that result in less destruction:

Oh, the math is real simple. The test was obviously designed to not include what you now which to include. That is the point of tests. To keep it simply. In other word: The test did not fail to include anything. It was working as designed.

But the math of downscaling ICBM to actually available ballistic missiles is quite simple. That is the context of my statement.

You tested for optimum results at Tokyo where there is massive factory concentration. Your test might be applicable to Chongqing which has high concentration also, but I doubt it is to places with lower factory numbers.

It works the other way around. The amount of factories destroyed should be same in all plains, at least apart from the quite relevant random fluctuations. But where there are more factories and infra, there the repairs can happen at a higher rate. Tokyo is the most relevant target.

Basically, the player is required to inspect ALL of the target provinces in China every day (or as you suggested every 5 hours).

Also ICBMs cannot properly utilize their speed of 8000 kph, in AoD they travel only at up to 200 kph from one province to the next. It took about a day for them to travel from Costa Rica to Tokyo.

Practically speaking one needs to mission all or nearly all of them right at the start of the war, but with missions starting about 5 hours apart from each other. After that it is just watching the destruction to unfold.

EDIT: And those targets are - in fact - quite difficult to find in China. We are not discussing the very much easier view of inspecting all of the provinces with factories (after every day's bombing) in the British Isles or on Honshu.

I consider them easy to find, but maybe that is just because i am used to knowing where they are.