Japan '46 Operation Coronet Allied AAR

[ComradeP]

Absolutely brilliant AAR! There is a ton of useful information here to allow the campaign to be improved.

Thanks for the compliment.

I was afraid it wouldn't be that interesting to read due to the frontline moving in very small steps on most days.

I think that the high Japanese quality is a key issue, just as it is in J45. Personally, I am not sure there should be any quality A Japanese. Fixing this one issue would have many flow on effects that would help improve balance. Also a more delayed release schedule for the Japanese would seem to make a lot of sense.

It's less of an issue than it was in Japan '45, I'd say, as at least B quality units have a chance to become Disrupted when they take losses. Theoretically, A quality units can also become Disrupted if they take losses to the extent that Fatigue becomes 100 or higher, or if they're Low Ammo, but that doesn't happen too often.

I don't think it would make much difference if the Naval Landing units were B. Given the firepower penalties imposed by terrain and trenches or fortifications, it would still be very difficult to throw them out of Fujisawa.

On both invasion fronts, the bulk of the Japanese divisions present is not at the frontline. Releases being delayed by a few days for units beyond Tokyo would still mean the Japanese have enough units to form a solid frontline. My western advance was already more or less stalled before Japanese reinforcements from the north showed up.

It would help if many of the various militia and Boeitai units would be Fixed for the duration in their own city. They were intended as a local defence force, but they're currently a large addition to the field armies.

Some of the parameter data values need to be tweaked. Unit recovery rates are a possible example. Even before quality is considered the Japanese rate is twice the Allied rate. In a long campaign this makes a big difference. Particularly for an outnumbered attacker.

As the Victory Dialog shows, Japanese losses can be very rough so the recovery rate by itself might need to be this high to prevent the Japanese army from rapidly losing cohesion. My strategic problem is that I can't put enough pressure on the Japanese in most sectors for their losses to matter, which is why I'm currently pushing along the coast in the east. The Navy inflicts terrible losses on Japanese units in Field hexes.

I minor point is that loss recovery is not affected by whether a unit is combined or broken down. If it was, that would be a bug. The chance of recovery is simply based on losses. A unit with 150 losses would recover the same number on average as three component units with 50 losses each. Perhaps I misunderstood what you are saying.

I wrote "loss recovery" and meant the recovery of losses, not the Recovery mechanic. I also mention the Replacement mechanic.

Though you're correct that Recovery is based on a percentage of losses, units with additional components can still Recover losses more efficiently as my usual deployment is 2 companies at the frontline and 1 (3 component unit) or 2 (4 component unit) in the rear.

With 3 components, 1/3 of the battalion can Recover/receive Replacements each turn. With 4 components, 1/2 the battalion can rest and Recover/receive Replacements per turn. Aside from more efficient Fatigue management, that is one of the good parts about units with 4 or more components.