RE: New Allied CinC

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: New Allied CinC

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> After Action Reports >> RE: New Allied CinC

Page: << < prev 48 49 [50] 51 52 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: New Allied CinC - 11/28/2005 12:44:01 AM

Rob Brennan UK

Posts: 3685
Joined: 8/24/2002
From: London UK
Status: offline

Oscars die ! .. fact of life really .. the lightning losses were horrible though . you still seem to have the experience edge. if possible maybe not give him easy kills to rack up some xp with the LR fighters ( lot easier said than done i do understand).

I'm so happy this is continuing

_____________________________

sorry for the spelling . English is my main language , I just can't type . and i'm too lazy to edit :)

(in reply to Speedysteve)

Post #: 1471

RE: New Allied CinC - 11/28/2005 1:51:43 AM

AmiralLaurent

Posts: 3351
Joined: 3/11/2003
From: Near Paris, France
Status: offline

Glad to see this AAR continue, PzB !

I hesitate to step forward for the role of CinC, but 1) I have read this AAR and was uneasy to continue the game in this condition 2) has probably not enough time for one more PBEM.

As for demoralizing Allied players, I think it is over. Now every battle were your losses are less than twice the Allied ones should be seen as a victory....

(in reply to Rob Brennan UK)

Post #: 1472

RE: New Allied CinC - 11/28/2005 2:02:44 AM

Nomad

Posts: 5905
Joined: 9/5/2001
From: West Yellowstone, Montana
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wolfie1

Ye Gods! How many Allied players are you going to demoralise PzB

Let's clear this up, I am not demoralized. I am unhappy about my financial situation and my inability to afford an internet connection at home( I still have this one from work, I can use it occasionally but not for sending/receiving turns).
BTW, I hate working Saturdays and working Sundays really sucks.

In fact, I was optimistic about my chances in this game. My goal was to get at least a draw and I think that is a reasonable goal. I'll be interested in how AndyMac does, I sent him a long email a little bit ago.

For all of you out there, unless you really understand the complete position of the Allies you really do not understand the position I and now AndyMac were in. I see some critisim above about 'going to a party without enough forces',etc. Well, there just are not any more. It would be extremmly interesting if John made the 1/19/42 turn available and others tried to continue. I would like to see just what everyone else would do. The Allies have to do something, they have to engage and score some points or lose on auto victory 1/1/44. If you attack, and even if you don't, the IJN can send in bombardment and surface combat fleets to damage/destroy your bases, aircraft, shipping, etc. Anyway, AndyMac is in charge now and we will see what happens.

_____________________________

(in reply to Wolfie1)

Post #: 1473

RE: New Allied CinC - 11/28/2005 2:11:19 AM

AmiralLaurent

Posts: 3351
Joined: 3/11/2003
From: Near Paris, France
Status: offline

By the way, I had an experience in UV where I lost an opponent for family reason and I asked for a replacement. Three valuable players stepped in and I played against all 3, each having his own style and strategy.

Of course 3 UV PBEM took less time than one in WITP but it is always possible to do so.

(in reply to Nomad)

Post #: 1474

RE: New Allied CinC - 11/28/2005 8:06:15 AM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

Nice to hear that so many of you considered taking over this game

I hope you don't mind
that a brute from Scotland now represents the UK Rob & Speedy <G>

Taking on 3 players would have been interesting Laurent, unfortunately I don't have the time.. Going to
look into WPO with the little spare time I have.

I think most readers know why you had to let go Ken, the point of 'demoralization' is merely used
humorously..how many other games have seen one side played by 4 different players!?

Andy Mac thought
you did a great job, and so do I. Compared to your predecessors you're the one who lost fewest assets. I have
offered to send the game turns to anyone who's interested in reviewing the current situation in more detail.

I'm thinking about using more unexperienced Oscars to boost my defenses. They don't achieve much
anyway but they seem to make it easier for my more experienced and capable fighter Daitai's to hit back.

The process of evacuating construction and base force units from the Solomons. No use having too much
support for bases that are within 4 hexes of enemy LBA. My aim is to always fight the Allies from 4+ hexes with
my air force.

I've turned some of the fleet heading for Truk back towards Sag Sag: 13 ships will attempt a hit and run if not
intercepted by enemy medium and heavy bombers again. Tomorrow the Yamato and Musashi will be together
in port for the first time. Together with the Nagato and Mutsu they provide me with a very heavy surface
combat group. Imagine engaging a couple of Iowa's next year

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 07/22/43

Invasions

A small invasion force arrived at Aru and Sag Sag to unload troops!
The small combat group at Sag Sag was zapped by enemy LBA and is not
capable of protecting the base.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 1026 troops unloading over beach at Aru Island, 39,80

Allied ground losses:
40 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coastal Guns at Sag Sag, 57,88, firing at TF 1161
TF 1161 troops unloading over beach at Sag Sag, 57,88

161 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.
Allied Ships
LCI LCI-331
CL Hobart
CL Nashville
LCI LCI-327, Shell hits 1
DD Jenkins, Shell hits 2
LCI LCI-223, Shell hits 1
DD Isaac Sweers
LCI LCI-217
DD Monssen, Shell hits 1
LCI LCI-216
LCI LCI-85
LCI LCI-84
LCI LCI-83
LCI LCI-62
LCI LCI-24
LCI LCI-23
LCI LCI-22
MSW Skylark
LST LST-31
LST LST-30
LST LST-20

Japanese ground losses:
125 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

Allied ground losses:
528 casualties reported
Guns lost 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Air Combat

I've included the following air strikes to illustrate how LBA are capable of
reducing LCUs in no time. More than 600 men were causalties for the ca 180 enemy
bombers that attacked today.

Day Air attack on 2nd/B Division, at 57,88

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 18
Kittyhawk I x 6
Beaufort V-IX x 7
P-38G Lightning x 74
A-20G Havoc x 12
B-25J Mitchell x 71
B-17E Fortress x 35
B-24D Liberator x 12

No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
404 casualties reported
Guns lost 4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 2nd/B Division, at 57,88

Allied aircraft
Beaufighter Mk 21 x 62
P-40N Warhawk x 10

No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
110 casualties reported
Guns lost 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 2nd/B Division, at 57,88

Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 27

No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
124 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Situation map: Enemy landings at Aru island

Aru island is a pretty useless little place, a size 0 airfield. I'm going to leave it alone, but
any move against Kai island will be met with extreme violence. I don't want a size 4 enemy af there.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to AmiralLaurent)

Post #: 1475

RE: New Allied CinC - 11/28/2005 2:51:25 PM

WhoCares

Posts: 653
Joined: 7/6/2004
Status: offline

Kiamana (A:SPS 1, P:SPS 2) and Babo (2,1) might also be good targets for him, threatening your reeinforcements and retreats along the PNG coast.

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1476

RE: New Allied CinC - 11/28/2005 3:07:32 PM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

I already got engineers building forts at Babo - have to check Kiamana, can't remember were it is

If Andy wants to play ball in this area he's welcome. There is a full army and a powerful fleet at Balikpapan
just waiting for the opportunity to deliver a really heavy counter punch

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to WhoCares)

Post #: 1477

RE: New Allied CinC - 11/28/2005 3:17:06 PM

Speedysteve

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline

quote:

I hope you don't mind that a brute from Scotland now represents the UK Rob & Speedy

Hmm. I'm not sure John

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1478

RE: New Allied CinC - 11/28/2005 3:59:42 PM

WhoCares

Posts: 653
Joined: 7/6/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PzB

I already got engineers building forts at Babo - have to check Kiamana, can't remember were it is
If Andy wants to play ball in this area he's welcome. There is a full army and a powerful fleet at Balikpapan
just waiting for the opportunity to deliver a really heavy counter punch

Kiamana is the dot-base two hexes below Babo - I knew I should have added that little info in the first post

The allies don't have the option to challenge you on sea, but when they can lure you out to make counterlandings and throw your naval forces against PT-boats and/or your land reserves into his LBA range - this is exactly what they need, many targets in LBA range. And some lucky dices, of course.....

< Message edited by WhoCares -- 11/28/2005 4:25:04 PM >

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1479

RE: New Allied CinC - 11/28/2005 5:03:44 PM

Rob Brennan UK

Posts: 3685
Joined: 8/24/2002
From: London UK
Status: offline

quote:

Nice to hear that so many of you considered taking over this game I hope you don't mind
that a brute from Scotland now represents the UK Rob & Speedy <G>

HAHA .. im 1/2 scot anyway so i don't mind at al .. watch out for the claymore sticking out from your shoulderblades.

_____________________________

sorry for the spelling . English is my main language , I just can't type . and i'm too lazy to edit :)

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1480

RE: New Allied CinC - 11/28/2005 6:12:34 PM

Wolfie1

Posts: 360
Joined: 12/22/2004
From: Blackpool, England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nomad

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wolfie1

Ye Gods! How many Allied players are you going to demoralise PzB

Let's clear this up, I am not demoralized. I am unhappy about my financial situation and my inability to afford an internet connection at home( I still have this one from work, I can use it occasionally but not for sending/receiving turns).
BTW, I hate working Saturdays and working Sundays really sucks.

In fact, I was optimistic about my chances in this game. My goal was to get at least a draw and I think that is a reasonable goal. I'll be interested in how AndyMac does, I sent him a long email a little bit ago.

For all of you out there, unless you really understand the complete position of the Allies you really do not understand the position I and now AndyMac were in. I see some critisim above about 'going to a party without enough forces',etc. Well, there just are not any more. It would be extremmly interesting if John made the 1/19/42 turn available and others tried to continue. I would like to see just what everyone else would do. The Allies have to do something, they have to engage and score some points or lose on auto victory 1/1/44. If you attack, and even if you don't, the IJN can send in bombardment and surface combat fleets to damage/destroy your bases, aircraft, shipping, etc. Anyway, AndyMac is in charge now and we will see what happens.

Not intended as criticism Nomad, just a tonge in cheek reference to the number of players PzB seems to be going through

_____________________________

Teamwork is essential - it gives the enemy someone else to shoot at.....

(in reply to Nomad)

Post #: 1481

RE: New Allied CinC - 11/29/2005 3:25:28 AM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

A claymore would be preferable to haggis Rob

I captured Kiamana to make it easier to spot an Allied advance in the are Who Cares.
It's difficult for Andy to advance in the area without bringing in substantial reinforcements.
Don't think he can afford that yet, so any counter offensive will be strong enough to smash
any allied landings. A size 0/1 airfield can only provide CAP and heavy/medium bombers will
not be able to stop me.

The fleet at Balikpapan will move forward to Kendari and be ready. Early actions indicate new
Allied CinC is warmonger

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 07/23/43

Air Combat

I noticed that Andy increased his CAP over Chungking so I wanted to show him
how things work up in the north

Some 49 Allied ac, mostly Chinese, were destroyed
today.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Chungking , at 43,32

Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 47
Ki-21 Sally x 70
Ki-48 Lily x 34
Ki-49 Helen x 22
Ki-46-III Dinah x 5

Allied aircraft
I-153c x 9
I-16c x 5

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-43-IIa Oscar: 3 destroyed, 2 damaged
Ki-21 Sally: 2 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
I-153c: 10 destroyed
I-16c: 2 destroyed, 1 damaged
SB-2c: 7 destroyed
IL-4c: 1 destroyed

Allied ground losses:
51 casualties reported

Airbase hits 12
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 27
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A final couple of attacks on my battle group at Sag Sag...only a handful remains
to resist the attack. It's unfortunate that air to ground combat is this effective as it
speed up the game considerably.

Day Air attack on 2nd/B Division, at 57,88

Allied aircraft
Beaufighter Mk 21 x 69
P-40N Warhawk x 12

No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
38 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 2nd/B Division, at 57,88

Allied aircraft
B-25J Mitchell x 43
B-24D Liberator x 54

No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
262 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Again the Allied heavies find my surface group - from very long range this time.
Even at 30kt the ships are hit repeatedly. Damage is slight, but the area is too hot.
Only enemy PT boats left at Sag Sag anyway.

Day Air attack on TF at 60,82

Japanese aircraft
Ki-45 KAIb Nick x 6

Allied aircraft
P-38G Lightning x 4
B-24D Liberator x 34

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-45 KAIb Nick: 2 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
B-24D Liberator: 9 damaged

Japanese Ships
DD Hatsuharu
CA Atago, Bomb hits 4
DD Minegumo
DD Shiratsuyu, Bomb hits 1, on fire
CA Furutaka, Bomb hits 1
DD Naganami
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground Combat

I might just as well not have put any troops into Sag Sag

Only amphibious
landings will prove challenging for Allied LCU's in the future.

Ground combat at Sag Sag

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 3583 troops, 31 guns, 0 vehicles

Defending force 136 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles

Allied assault odds: 126 to 1 (fort level 0)

Allied forces CAPTURE Sag Sag base !!!

Japanese ground losses:
72 casualties reported

Allied ground losses:
33 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

Defeated Japanese Units Retreating!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Aru Island

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 112 troops, 2 guns, 0 vehicles

Defending force 0 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles

Allied assault odds: 3 to 1 (fort level 0)

Allied forces CAPTURE Aru Island base !!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to Wolfie1)

Post #: 1482

RE: New Allied CinC - 12/1/2005 6:13:29 AM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

Things are progressing as expected in the South Pacific and I'm considering two options.
Simply wait until Andy is forced to change tactics or continue with Operation 'Summer Wind'.

All my carriers are operational (except the Kaga which is down to 47 sys damage) and it would
be fun to tour the shipping lanes between PH and the West Coast.

What do you think, too risky or worth a try? US carriers are still inferior and I doubt Andy would
sacrifice them at this stage.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 07/24/43

Invasions

Another 'barge invasion' - Buka this time. About 6k defenders and 5 forts.

TF 1177 encounters mine field at Buka (63,90)

TF 1177 troops unloading over beach at Buka, 63,90

Allied Ships
MSW Dubbo
PT PT-279, Mine hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
PT PT-285, Mine hits 1, on fire, heavy damage

Coastal Guns at Buka, 63,90, firing at TF 1177
8 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.
Allied Ships
PT PT-281

Allied ground losses:
516 casualties reported
Vehicles lost 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Air Combat

All Andy has to do is concentrate his LBA at one target a time and then send in
10 men with broom sticks to mop it all up

Day Air attack on 53rd Naval Guard Unit, at 54,87

Allied aircraft
Kittyhawk I x 8
P-39D Airacobra x 19
B-25J Mitchell x 33

Allied aircraft losses
B-25J Mitchell: 1 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
110 casualties reported
Guns lost 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Maizuru 2nd SNLF, at 63,90

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 5
SBD Dauntless x 42
Kittyhawk I x 9
P-39D Airacobra x 64

Allied aircraft losses
SBD Dauntless: 1 damaged
P-39D Airacobra: 1 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
112 casualties reported
Guns lost 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 56th Construction Battalion, at 63,90

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 6
P-40N Warhawk x 22

No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
54 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 141st IJA Base Force, at 63,90

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 27
SBD Dauntless x 37
P-40N Warhawk x 19
B-17E Fortress x 24

No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
53 casualties reported
Guns lost 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 141st IJA Base Force, at 63,90

Allied aircraft
P-40N Warhawk x 20
B-17E Fortress x 13
PB4Y Liberator x 3

No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
27 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground Combat

Andy brought 2 tank battaliosn to Buka!! What do you think of that

Ground combat at Buka

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 1054 troops, 1 guns, 0 vehicles

Defending force 2427 troops, 0 guns, 133 vehicles
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1483

RE: New Allied CinC - 12/1/2005 4:31:44 PM

Rob Brennan UK

Posts: 3685
Joined: 8/24/2002
From: London UK
Status: offline

quote:

What do you think, too risky or worth a try? US carriers are still inferior and I doubt Andy would
sacrifice them at this stage.

I doubt they are anywhere near that area anyway. most likely they are behind the front in the Coral sea somewhere. well thats where i'd have them

_____________________________

sorry for the spelling . English is my main language , I just can't type . and i'm too lazy to edit :)

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1484

RE: New Allied CinC - 12/1/2005 11:53:18 PM

gregoryvanhouten

Posts: 4
Joined: 9/19/2005
Status: offline

I say give it a shot while you still can. It may be an opportunity to really mess with his plans and slow him down a little. The only reservation I would have is that he has been reading your thread, and probably knows that you have been planning this for a while.

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1485

RE: New Allied CinC - 12/2/2005 7:48:51 AM

aztez

Posts: 4031
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline

quote:

do you think, too risky or worth a try? US carriers are still inferior and I doubt Andy would sacrifice them at this stage.

He propably does not have anything left to threaten you with so I would encourage you to go forward with this operation too

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1486

RE: New Allied CinC - 12/2/2005 7:48:58 AM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

Nice to have you onboard Gregory, pretty new on the forums I see! Welcome you are

I must say I feel the same way: my carriers ain't very usefull against barge invasions and LBA.
So why keep them in port while we are still able to sail the Oceans unopposed?

I've kept Operation Summerwind on stand bye for a few weeks, so preparations have been made.
There is 120k units of fuel at Saipan and another 20k at Marcus island - these will be the staging bases
for the carriers.

5 spy subs have already been deployed deep in the Pacific (their scout ac have been ordered to stand down).
A replenishment group with 6 fleet oilers and escorts left Tokyo today and will move into the Central Pacific.

At Truk 4 carrier divisions were formed around my 15 carriers. Each TF got a little less than 200 ac and is supported
by one fast Kongo class battleships and 4-5 destroyers including all my new Akitsuki class ships. The carrier divisions
are all relatively light but still carries a heavy punch - both in the air and at sea.

When the fleet reached Marcus Island the spy subs will deploy east of Pearl Harbou and 8-10 hexes out from the West Coast.
I will attempt to shadow and plot as meny enemy convoys as possible and release the carriers only when a rich target
environment has been established

I will leave the bulk of my battlefleet at Truk together with 10 destroyers. The escort carrier fleet at Balikpapan will be on its
own for a while. The new cve Kaiyo joined the fleet yesterday and another one is due in a few days.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 07/25/43

Surface Combat

Andy introduced some of his new 'sneakiness' and moved his PT boats to Emirau.
This means running them out of fuel.. They sank a few barges and a patrol craft.
The latter was of the new type but couldn't do much to hold the angry gnats away.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Emirau Island at 60,84

Japanese Ships
AG AG-101, Shell hits 3, on fire
AG AG-104, Shell hits 1
AG AG-105
AG AG-109, Shell hits 6, on fire, heavy damage
AG AG-110, Shell hits 1
AG AG-112, Shell hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
AG AG-121
AG AG-352
AG AG-5030
AG AG-5050
AG AG-5051
AG AG-5052
AG AG-5165
AG AG-2056
AG AG-2065
AG AG-2090, Shell hits 5, on fire

Allied Ships
PT PT-235, Shell hits 1
PT PT-236
PT PT-237
PT PT-242
PT PT-244

Japanese ground losses: (I've been ferrying base force units from Rabaul and Kavieng!)
137 casualties reported
Guns lost 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Emirau Island at 60,84

Japanese Ships
PC Hachijo, Shell hits 49, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk

Allied Ships
PT PT-235
PT PT-236
PT PT-237
PT PT-242
PT PT-244
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground Combat

The first Allied attack on Buka almost captures the place! I've ordered my transport
ac to airlift as many troops as possible out. Should be enough to rebuild them. There
are 1 SNLF, 1 construction unit and 2 base force units there.

Ground combat at Buka

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 2347 troops, 0 guns, 128 vehicles

Defending force 5257 troops, 1 guns, 0 vehicles

Allied assault odds: 4 to 1 (fort level 4)

Allied Assault reduces fortifications to 0

Japanese ground losses:
236 casualties reported
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to gregoryvanhouten)

Post #: 1487

RE: New Allied CinC - 12/2/2005 8:28:22 AM

Gen.Hoepner

Posts: 3645
Joined: 9/4/2001
From: italy
Status: offline

I'd suggest to select very carefull leaders for your CV TFs. When you operate with many TFs the risk of having them reacting and so spreading around during a CV engagement is very high if very aggressive leaders are put in charge.
Be carefull and keep your forces united!

_____________________________

[image]http://yfrog.com/2m70331348022314716641664j [/image]

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1488

RE: New Allied CinC - 12/2/2005 11:30:51 AM

Honda

Posts: 953
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Karlovac, Croatia
Status: offline

One more thing. What I am about to suggest goes against the prime WitP rule which says that the more you stack the more you gain. I belive that when you do find yourself in target rich environment you should scatter your 4 TFs in all directions (of course, still in the general direction of the bounty, better yet its projected position the next day). That should give you a day (maybe two if you should want) of much more flexible and better strikes on greater number of targets. If his CVs are around, you'll know it and won't scatter, but if they aren't they also aren't one day away. Or two. So, one or two days of rampage, and then back to formation and home.

_____________________________

AAR of my game vs Raver on my clan forum in croatian language (despite the language differences, no Ravers allowed)

(in reply to Gen.Hoepner)

Post #: 1489

RE: New Allied CinC - 12/2/2005 11:53:02 AM

wobbly

Posts: 1095
Joined: 10/16/2002
From: Christchurch, New Zealand
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gen.Hoepner

I'd suggest to select very carefull leaders for your CV TFs. When you operate with many TFs the risk of having them reacting and so spreading around during a CV engagement is very high if very aggressive leaders are put in charge.
Be carefull and keep your forces united!

No, use the old technique of following a surface fleet - they wont disobey follow commands.

_____________________________

(in reply to Gen.Hoepner)

Post #: 1490

RE: New Allied CinC - 12/2/2005 3:19:19 PM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

Nice with some input

I agree Hoepner, have to find commanders with low aggression ratings! I've tried to have my carrier divisions following a
surface combat group only to see them react against potential targets because of an aggressive leader.

Been thinking over how to execute the operation for a while...We need a new name by the way: Andy knows about the old one.
'Operation Monsun Rain' it will be called from now on!

After receiving intel from out spy subs the KB will move in as a combined unit and then fan out in 4 different directions.
For 2-3 days each carrier division will steam out before reversing course in an eliptical pattern. After 4-6 days the KB will be reformed.
A quick SWOT evaluation will then decide whether we head home or continue the mission.

I've created an illustration!

Operation Monsun Rain

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to wobbly)

Post #: 1491

RE: New Allied CinC - 12/2/2005 4:05:57 PM

pauk

Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline

Hm...don't expect too much. As you know I'm playing against Mac and after one more miserable result at PH (no single ship sunk, not even PT) i've decided to hide KB NNW and wait for his damaged warships. Subs with glens are sent on sea route to provide useful info.

I was prepared that i could wait a month or more, but after a month my glens reported only single PG or MSW. On rare occasions enemy fleet cosisted of one MSW and one small AK were spotted. Finally, when Vals spot enemy sub in the area, my great plan ended....

KB harvested 2 or 3 PGs and one MSW...

Andy like "naval coast guard" on sea route and you may be faced with coastal guard too...

_____________________________

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1492

RE: New Allied CinC - 12/2/2005 5:11:45 PM

AmiralLaurent

Posts: 3351
Joined: 3/11/2003
From: Near Paris, France
Status: offline

If your opponent is using PG/MSW as a patrol line, they may be seen by Glens. If they don't move or move always from the same pattern (for example, PG sailing from PH to Dutch Harbor, refuel, returned to PH and so on), you can use CL to strike and sink them. Or try to ambush them with submarines.

Either you prepare your raid with such skirmishing or you dare to send your CV TF blind, with no naval search until it reaches the target area.

(in reply to pauk)

Post #: 1493

RE: New Allied CinC - 12/2/2005 5:55:37 PM

soeren01

Posts: 393
Joined: 6/25/2004
From: Bayern
Status: offline

4 to 6 days may be a little bit to long.
How long do US carriers need to reach you coming from Pearl or SF ?

_____________________________

soeren01, formerly known as Soeren
CoG FoF
PacWar WIR BoB BTR UV WITP WITE WITW

(in reply to AmiralLaurent)

Post #: 1494

RE: New Allied CinC - 12/2/2005 7:03:59 PM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

I'm not planning to use my carrier based search planes - my subs will be our eyes. It shall be a surprise when we finally de-cloak!

The fighters will be on 90% CAP - that should be some 400 or so. I got 5 subs ready, another one has to refuel at Kwajalein in 2 days before heading towards Pearl.

Andy is starting to feel that he got things under control now! He has read my plans and knows he can proceed his slow advance covered by his LBA.
So we need to do something about it and disturb his plans and buildup! If he doesn't want to come out and play I'll give the tree a good shake!-)

4-6 days is a tentative amount of time. There are several factors that will have to be included in the equation:

1.) Are the US carriers in PH? They're certainly not on the West Coast - why should they?
2.) Does Andy want to sortie his carriers and risk an even fight? Spotting one carrier division won't tell him much about its composition.
3.) My subs will try to cover the area between the KB and PH - they should spot the US fleet if it sorties.
4.) Will it be possible to intercept one of the carrier divisions based on only one or two spottings? I can re-form the KB at flank speed in just a couple of days.
5.) Even the loss of 2-3 carriers will not cripple the KB. There would still be 12-13 left!

There is so much that can happend that I'm more than willing to take the chance as we have a lot more to win than loose. A second battle
of the Marne is just what we need now

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to soeren01)

Post #: 1495

RE: New Allied CinC - 12/3/2005 10:53:55 AM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

The defense of New Britain, New Guinea and the northern Solomons continue even though it's a futile
battle. The Empire need as much time as possible and the main defensive perimeter has already been
armed, so while the loss of some LCUs is regretable it serves a purpose!

Many of the destroyers and cruisers in the fleet are undergoing repairs and refit in Hong Kong, Singapore
and Japan, so I will only react against serious threats while the KB is busy.

Here is the breakdown of the Kido Butai:

Carrier Division 1 176 ac

Cv Shokaku and Zuikaku
Cvl Shoho
BB Haruna
Cl Noshiro
3 destroyers

Carrier Division 2 199 ac

Cv Akagi and Taiho
Cvl Zuiho and Chitose
BB Kirishima
4 destroyers

Carrier Division 3 197 ac

Cv Junyo and Hiyo
Cvl Ryujo and Ryuho
BB Kongo
3 destroyers

Carrier Division 4 197 ac

Cv Unry, Amagi and Katsuragi
Cvl Chitose
BB Hiei
Ca Furutaka
4 destroyers

A total of:
9 fleet and 6 light carriers carrying 769 ac
Escorted by: 4 fast battleships, 1 heavy and 1 light cruiser + 14 destroyers

Most of the airgroups are highly trained, but there are a few Zeke squadrons with an average of 55-60 exp.
This is because I'm in the process of training new units in China - when these arrive at Truk they will replace
the less experienced groups. Quite difficult to keep almost a 1000 trained pilots on my carriers at all times.
Luxury problem!?

I've also decided not to place too many aditional air groups on the carriers, actually trying to reform the original
Daitai's as I've found this to be more efficient in combat. Overdo it and you'll find your carriers launching small or
unescorted raids when you need it the least...very frustrating, so we're not taking any risks.

Got a little concern regarding Op Monsun Rain: 3 of my fleet oilers are damaged and the remainder only carries
60k units of fuel. A regular tanker TF will replenish the KB when they head back towards Saipan after the mission.
So we have to cover the distance from Marcus Island and to the Central Pacific and back + the execution of the
'Death Star' manouver on what the ships have in their tanks + 60k fuel from the fleet oilers. Will use cruise speed
most of the time!

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 07/26/43

Air Combat

I ordered my fighter bombers to naval attack to punish Andy's PT boats as I knew
they would run out of fuel. A bit gamey to operate them beyond their max range Andy

Earlier you saw how PT boats with 20mm Oerlikon cannons shot up one of my destroyers with
only a few hits. Now you see how 37mm and 20mm cannons fail to even damage flimsy PT boats?
I smell a rat...

Day Air attack on TF at 58,87

Japanese aircraft
Ki-45 KAIb Nick x 10

No Japanese losses

Allied Ships
PT PT-376
PT PT-374, Shell hits 8
PT PT-170, Shell hits 8

Aircraft Attacking:
2 x Ki-45 KAIb Nick attacking at 100 feet
4 x Ki-45 KAIb Nick attacking at 100 feet
4 x Ki-45 KAIb Nick attacking at 100 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground Combat

Buka falls but elements of all units have been evacuated! The SNLF unit only
got 36 damaged and 1 operational squads left.

Ground combat at Buka

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 3996 troops, 43 guns, 134 vehicles

Defending force 3053 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles

Allied assault odds: 26 to 1 (fort level 1)

Allied forces CAPTURE Buka base !!!

Japanese ground losses:
1003 casualties reported (the remains of a construction unit - mostly support troops - was destroyed)

Allied ground losses:
4 casualties reported
Guns lost 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1496

RE: New Allied CinC - 12/3/2005 3:25:26 PM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

Today Green Island got the hammer! Massive strikes claims some 500 casualties. An air bridge has been initiated and the remaining troops
will be air lifted out. This is the inevitable fate of many forward bases over the coming weeks and months.

The plan is to make a determined stand on a line following Wewak, Truk, Ponape and Kwajalein.
A major effort will be required to captured these islands and hopefully we can delay their fall to the end of the year or so.
By then both the Army and Navy air force should be a power to be reconed with.
The Combined Fleet should also be at peak strength in a few months and another large batch of Army reinforcements right around the corner.

Tomorrow the KB arrives at Saipan were it will refuel and be assigned rather careful commanders

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 07/27/43

Air Combat

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 9th AF Construction Battalion, at 63,89

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 2
SBD Dauntless x 37
Kittyhawk I x 9
P-39D Airacobra x 63
P-40N Warhawk x 21

Allied aircraft losses
SBD Dauntless: 1 destroyed, 7 damaged
P-39D Airacobra: 1 damaged
P-40N Warhawk: 1 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
151 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 9th AF Construction Battalion, at 63,89

Allied aircraft
B-25J Mitchell x 62
B-17E Fortress x 29
PB4Y Liberator x 12

Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress: 2 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
249 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 9th AF Construction Battalion, at 63,89

Allied aircraft
B-25J Mitchell x 33

Allied aircraft losses
B-25J Mitchell: 2 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
47 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground Combat

Base force remants at Buka were eliminated! Mostly disabled support troops.

Ground combat at Buka

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 4011 troops, 41 guns, 133 vehicles

Defending force 500 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles

Allied assault odds: 91 to 1

Japanese ground losses:
2256 casualties reported
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1497

RE: New Allied CinC - 12/3/2005 4:55:24 PM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

Not a lot to report today, 12 transports were intercepted and shot down over Green Island but the bulk of 2 base force units were brought out.

The KB has received commanders that have aggression ratings around 40, let's see how well they can perform.
It will take at least 2-3 weeks before the carriers are in position.

A Glen spotted a ship heading west towards Perth of the north Australian coast! I-7 will join I-11 and investigate further as the ship was id'd as a
heavy cruiser?

There are currently 9 subs in service that carries Glen search planes: 2 of the North Australian coast, 1 west of the Aleutians, 1 east of Wake and 5 in
the Central Pacific.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 07/28/43 - turn 600!

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1498

RE: New Allied CinC - 12/3/2005 5:21:30 PM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

Behold the might of the Combined Fleet

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1499

RE: New Allied CinC - 12/3/2005 5:43:27 PM

String

Posts: 2661
Joined: 10/7/2003
From: Estonia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PzB

Behold the might of the Combined Fleet

Ah yes, THAT picture

. Sadly one of the few real good jap propaganda pics I've found so far. But it sure gives a lasting impression

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1500

Page: << < prev 48 49 [50] 51 52 next > >>

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> After Action Reports >> RE: New Allied CinC