Battle Report: Battle of the Phillippine Sea

[shermanM4A1]

I tried to simulate the Battle of the Phillippine Sea using 100 pt. builds.

The Japanese fleet:

Shokaku (20)
---Zeke (6)
---Val (10)
---Kate (13)
Tone (23)
2x I-19 (26)

Total: 98 points

The American fleet:

USS Enterprise
---Wildcat
---Dauntless
---Devastator
USS Atlanta
3x USS Fletcher
USS Barb

My friend and I played two games, one with each fleet. That way, we both got a chance to try the USN and the IJN.

The Results:
1st game:
The Kate and the Devastator were destroyed first turn.
Then, the Japanese lost the Tone to a Dauntless attack.
Afterwards, the US sunk an IJN Submarine.
After capturing 2 objectives and destroying the Zeke, the USN won.

2nd game:
Again, the Tone was destroyed early on. This time it was vitaled by the Dauntless.
Then, the Fletchers wiped out the IJN submarines.
Using only a Shokaku, the IJN made a last ditch effort to capture an objective with it.
Attacking with the USS Atlanta and the USS Barb, the USN sunk the Shokaku.

So, in both games, the IJN lost. Since the US pieces cost less, I could fit more of them in a fleet. Meanwhile, the high pt. cost of the IJN pieces limited the number of pieces I can include in a 100 pt. Japanese fleet. This causes weird moves, such as a Shokaku charging the objective.

[TheJudge]

No surprise there. Simulating Phillipine Sea with 100 point fleets means you're doing about 3 minutes of it. :D

[weedsrock2]

Thanks for the battle report! I think it does demonstrate the slight imbalance in point costing for the IJN verus the USN.

Looking at the builds I would recommend substituting a Yukikaze for one of the I-19s. You are paying a lot for long-lance torpedoes so you should buy units that actually have them. Then adjust your tactics to put them to use. Especially now that surface ship torpedoes can fire in the 'surface attack' phase.

The long-lance torpedoes are the IJN's most powerful weapon. In my opinion, you will not get your 'points worth' out of an IJN fleet if you don't use a strategy that puts them to use.

If you really insist on a carrier centric force then replace one of the I-19's with two more Zeke's and use them from the land base until they replace shot down carrier aircraft.

An extra 10 pts (10% pure IJN fleet bonus a la Warspite) would have allowed an additional Val. Or you could delete one I-19 and add two Yukikaze's. That would be just about right versus the Americans in my opinion.

100 pt fleets will often result in wierd tactics like carriers chasing objectives. I think it really takes 200 pt fleets to get more balanced gameplay and less dependence on dice rolls.

[shermanM4A1]

For the Japanese fleet, I can change it in one of two ways:

Fleet 1:
Shokaku (20)
---Zeke (6)
---Val (10)
---Kate (13)
Kongo (35)
Yukikaze (12)
Type 13 Subchaser (4)

Total: 100 points

This fleet sacrifices air power for more gunnery. The Kongo should be able to withstand several shots before sinking. However, the Type 13 subchaser is a poor escort and can be used at best for decoy only.

Fleet 2:
Shokaku (20)
---Zeke (6)
---Val (10)
---Kate (13)
Tone (23)
2x Yukikaze (24)
1x Type 13 Subchaser

Total: 98 points

Here, the Tone stays in the fleet and powers up my Val. Also, both the Tone and the Shokaku can have a Yukikaze escort, with the Type 13 subchaser as a decoy. However, like my original fleet, this one still lacks gunnery, unless I decide to fight with the Tone.