Great AAR and question

[lparkh]

First wanted to say just finished reading through the three AARs. Really nice effort on both player's parts. Took a fair while just to read them. Also exciting in that it who was going to win looked quite clear in 43 and the changed quite a bit later! I could see both players were sophisticated players too from their focus on destroying supply locations etc.

One question it seemed that the Americans had to deal with quite a bit of FOW. Yet historically (and in many other games) the americans have a very large intelligence advantage against the japanese. Is that modeled? How high an intelligence rating are americans given? (though doing so improves their research as well so a bit tricky).

From what I read and from historical perspective I might suggest a slightly higher value for americans.. but maybe it ruins game balance too much...

[Bill101]

Hi!

I'm glad you enjoyed reading through the AAR, we had a lot of fun playing it!

The USA starts the game with level 1 in intelligence and 2 further chits invested, with the potential to go up to level 5. British India also starts with 1 chit invested, so even without investing anything more, the allies could have a good chance of intelligence reports informing them of the position of enemy units.

I don't know off hand what level the allies reached, but you are right in saying that if they were allowed to go too high then it could ruin the game. But despite that, the allies do have the ability to reach a high level and get a lot of intelligence reports.

As Japanese, not knowing whether or not the enemy know where your fleet is really does affect your strategy. As I moved the Japanese fleet into battle towards the end, I was thinking "does he know where I am?", "am I walking into a trap?". I felt rather tense and nervous as my carriers surged forward... to a brief victory followed by ultimate defeat!

[Timskorn]

Getting the right intelligence at the right time can make a huge difference, and investing in it cannot be understated. As Bill alluded to, you can't afford to park your fleet in one spot for long periods of time nor assume you are coming with total surprise. I had one situation against the Japanese AI where I was moving my fleet towards Bougainville and was tipped off via intel of a Japanese flattop just west. I was able to directly strike the flattop at a good distance without having to get it revealed in the FOW first, then pulled my fleet back as I still wasn't sure what I was up against. Nevertheless I was able to strike first and sink a carrier!

This one revelation at the right time turned what could have been a surprise for ME into a loss of a flattop for the enemy with only aircraft losses for myself.

[LampCord]

Are fleets safer from detection out in the open sea than they are close to enemy shores? In other words, is shore based spotting taken into account or is intelligence just random?

[Timskorn]

Yes, any enemy held ports or towns can detect movement up to two tiles away. So be mindful of those little villages you decided not to take with your Marines, they are little listening posts in the ocean.

[SeaMonkey]

In the context of this thread I would like like to bring up a related consideration. Knowing that SC is more strategic oriented but tuned to tactical realities, I believe the radar advantage of the Allies should be included in the game to a certain degree, possibly also modelled in the research mechanism.

Throughout WW2, especially air and naval battles the tactical advantage the Allies had, through their superior radar detection, allowed them to gain the upperhand. To an extent the Axis also were able to develop their radar technology, but never to the same level as the Allies, they were always behind.

This tactical model could be initiated in the spotting ability of surface forces devoid of the all important air reconnaissance that is extended by long range air tech enhancements. Possibly LR spotting may need to be reined in a bit.

Now I realize this may be a bit complicated to infuse into the current SC edition, PTO, but looking into the future and after a lengthy evaluation, it could be something for Global SC.

For me, the anticipation of finding the enemy through your maneuver endeavors is one of the most compelling parts of the game, any wargame, and goes far in capturing the essence of "Fog of War".

I continue to be a strong proponent of "The Search".

[Blashy]

SeaMonkey, the Allies had that advantage because they invested in it, if Japan does the same then the advantage could be in their favor. That is one goal about these games, doing things different than history.

Still USA being already ahead prior to the war is factored in as Japan can only get 2 levels of Intelligence while USA can get 5, which helps simulation a little bit. At level 5 you pretty much spot enemy units every turn.

[Capt Andrew]

Speaking for my experience with the AAR...

Yes, FOW was a b-tch. But that's what REALLY adds to the flavor of the Pacific Campaign! At times, the tension was really paltable and I was really stressing about where Japan had their flattops! You can read by the AAR that it's vital. The Brits never invested anything in Intelligence... they were too busy trying to hold the Japs at the Salween River in Burma! And I very nearly lost that front... which would have folded like a cheap suit! China doesn't have the money to invest in Intelligence. It was strictly Anti-Aircraft and Infantry Weapons for me. I had great luck in infantry tech hits, but little help in AA.

The USA got up to level 3 Intelligence I believe. It was a big help at times. Unfortunately in the earlier intelligence reports, I was getting information about garrison units in Manchukuo, and that didn't help me at all. I did get quite a few Intelligence hits about IJN CV's off Indo-China and Borneo. But I wasn't in a position to take advantage of that. I did get a timely and helpful report about a carrier near north Japan twice near the end. The problem was... was it the same ship? Was it a second one? I used that intelligence information to dangle a lone AA Amphib transport near their spotting range, and quickly moved carriers and surface ships to the area in the hope that the Japanese would expose their carriers and entice a decisive naval battle. It worked, but it was much more costly than I anticipated!!!

As Bill said, the AAR was a lot of fun and hopefully gave some players some ideas to use. It was an older beta version, so some exploits we discovered were fixed. But to answer your question, yes, Intelligence is one of the most beneficial (at times) research areas in this theater. Much more so than in the ETO! I believe the Japanese are limited in their research in this area, so the historical advantage for the Allies is there for the taking...you just have to keep investing in it!

[Bill101]

I did keep moving my ships and carriers from port to port towards the end to confuse the allied intelligence reports and also because I was scared of being attacked before I was ready.

If she isn't doing very well then Japan does find it hard to find the MPPs to repair all her ships, and that's why it took me a while to prepare the navy for the final battle. As it is one or two carriers went in without full tech.

One thing about the naval battles is that if you can strike at one portion of the enemy's navy while the rest of it is several turns' distance away, then you can hit hard, sail away before the enemy counterattacks, and after refitting and resupplying in port be ready for the next battle. It takes a good mixture of both skill and luck to work!