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: VICTORY

 
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: VICTORY Page: <<   < prev  33 34 [35] 36 37   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: VICTORY - 8/6/2006 1:54:50 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		Just a quick comment:
1. I still say the solution to all of this is to give each side "pilot schools" into which they can allocate airframes and supplies to use to train pilots ( the more airframes and supplies the more flying time the pilots get and the more quickly they gain experience). There should be no limit on the number of airframes or pilots in these schools and players could set an experience level at which the pilots would "graduate" and go into the replacement pilot pool.

That way an Allied player who thinks ahead could produce 3000 or more pilots a month if he or she was willing to invest the material and airframes to do so while a Japanese player could do the same ( assuming they'd have the airframes and supplies... a much more difficult proposition for Japan). This is an equitable solution for both sides and not just knee-jerking one way and then another in a non-internally consistent manner.


2. Andy,
You have my sympathies. You are playing a good game and the game mechanics are biting you on the ass. I will just say one thing about PDU though. If this were a PDU game you would be able to downgrade all those fighter and fighter-bomber squadrons you have harrassing cut-off Japanese bases to less capable but still jobworthy Allied fighter and fighter-bomber types thus freeing all of your best fighters for allcation to the tip of the spear. You would also, for example, be able to fly hordes of different variants of the Corsair ( and not have to completely abandon the last model to upgrade to the newest model, especially when the last model of Corsair would still be entirely capable of making mincemeat of the Japanese opposition.).

So, I think you'd actually find the situation with PDU ON has its disadvantages and advantages for the Allies and Japanese and wouldn't, naturally, favour the Japanese. As a matter of fact I think it would tend to favour the Allies as a period of massive pilot losses and relatively similar ratios of airframe attrition would leave the Allies more able to quickly replenish their pilot pools and mount these pilots in the hordes of "slightly less than the best" fighters and fighter-bombers which continue to roll off the production line.

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1021
RE: VICTORY - 8/6/2006 2:54:53 PM   
aztez

 

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

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

p.s. remember that I am only getting about 30% of the historic Hellcat production so the airframe issue while real is a game issue (I still accumulate 144 unusable nightfighter variants per month) but that discusssion has been had already 144 Hellcats is not enough but we are stuck with this low production level for this game so be it.

I suspect the pilot issue is more because of the strategic situation where the USN is having to take on the bulk of the effort.

I now bitterly regret even attempting the Marianas as it emptied my pilot pool.

Just to give an example of scale every time I fill up a CVR to support the fleet I use up 8 weeks worth of USN Pilot production  you know this isnt like it is Iwo or Okinawa where I am attacking the Jap heartland this is the Phillipines for gawd sake where my LBA can lend a hand.

Anyone who thinks attacking the homeland in a PDU game with these levels of replacements is kidding themselves on. I am killing thousands of Zekes and Oscars imagine they are Tojos, Tonies, Georges and Jacks and be afraid be very afraid.

Andy





Yeah. That exactly what I'am afraid too in my game. Marianas will eat a chunk of those good fighters. I'am playing with PDU's off. But I don't think it downgrading to some older models is a solution. I mean Japanese have their pool of Georges, Jacks which are very capable fighters even in later years.


(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1022
RE: VICTORY - 8/6/2006 2:58:05 PM   
Sneer


Posts: 2654
Joined: 10/29/2003
Status: offline 		argument for players allocating resources in pilot trainig is old - probably the best one as on map bombing is a bit gamey. but there was never any reaction from matrix on this issue
most jap.
japanese situation wouldn't be as difficult - think about something like 800 nates and usually 500 oscars not counting claudes that are removed as obsolete in mid 42 and which would be excellent as training planes
and everybody playing as Japan would spend supply on this


_____________________________


(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 1023
RE: VICTORY - 8/6/2006 3:08:41 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		As I said pilot training is an issue but this particular game is a bad one to use as an example as my losses have been more severe because of the inability of SEAC to interfere with Jap training.

I suspect 60 is to low (especially in PDU) but I dont know it and as I said this is a bad game to use to test it as PZB eliminated India and the ability of the allies to interfere with training.

Nemo your point 2 doesnt wash I am afraid unless I am willing to use Corsairs on Carriers en masse something I have been loathe to do although I am now considering.

I have plenty of top notch LB Fighters my pool is choca with them P38's, P47's Spits, P51's, F4U's I have thousands of top notch fighters.

It is only in carrier aircraft (fighters especially) that I am struggling.

With PDU's on I would be able to switch refitting sqns of Hellcats to F4F's freeing up about another 200 Hellcats so I would have enough for 1 more days fighting but when the time came to use those carriers I would still need to find Hellcats from somewhere and in the meantime I would be facing better quality IJA and IJN fighters.

Trust me when I say PDU's favour the Japanese in 42 the allies in 43 and IMO the Japanese by a huge margin in 44/45. As the allies I dont need PDU to deploy the aircraft I need in 44/45 I have literally thousands of each type on map and have no problems massing them for ops.

An allied player should think long and hard before agreeing to play with PDU on imagine if every fight I have been in in the last few weeks has Tojo's or Franks instead of Oscars  or Jacks/Georges instead of Zekes

Andy

(in reply to Sneer)
Post #: 1024
RE: VICTORY - 8/6/2006 4:26:59 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline 		Biggest problem for me with all those discussions about PDU on/off, pilot training yes/no, replacement rates,... is the fact that PzB has completely increased his plane production. This is in my oppinion something that shouldn´t be done as Japanese. I agree on focussing on a few types when PDU on but producing 500 fighters of each type (or something like that) is way off. If it´s a game with PDU on and pilot training on (for Japanese as Allied wouldn´t need it anyway) and the Japanese player wouldn´t tripple his fighter production (or even more) then all those problems wouldn´t occur. No depleted Hellcat or pilot pool. But still an interesting game as the Allied player still has too think about what he´s doing. Not just going everywhere without the fear of losses from 1/44 on.

So the biggest problem in this game IMO is the immense production of PzB. I always try as Allied to cause trouble to the Japanese player´s supply of oil and therefore interupting his production by using my subs, but this of course isn´t possible if the Japanese player uses hundreds of Sallies and Helens for ASW duty. Most things just depend of the people playing the game. Everything should just go in more or less "normal" ways. But "normal" is different for different people. So far I had luck with my opponents and the house rules we had.

Nevertheless you and PzB are playing an exciting game.

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1025
RE: VICTORY - 8/6/2006 4:45:09 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		AndyMac
I think you should use them. All of my games, including the ones where I play as Japan, allow Corsairs on US carriers the instant they become available. From what I've read they could be used on carriers so why not use them? It is historically reasonable.

Also if it is a way around this in-game issue then there's added impetus IMO.

Perhaps a code change to allow players to switch pilots from one pool to another at the cost of some delay in them entering the 2nd pool. This could simulate carrier-landing training etc....

Either way, best of luck! I'm an avid follower of this one. Both of you are playing one hell of a game ( and I like your airborne invasions ;). I'm a fan of them myself )


(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1026
RE: VICTORY - 8/6/2006 11:00:33 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Thanks guys well I wont be using Marine COrsairs for a while (I do have 3 navy corsair gps that I use but that doestn ease the pilot pool strength)

Anyway on with the war my carriers and transports are en route to Southern Borneo where it is my intention to capture multiple supporting bases to use in operation against north Borneo.

3rd US Corps (3 Divs) will go in first and in a revision to the original plan I will send in 1st Amphib Corps (4Divs) to follow up and ensure I capture the bases. No half measures this is all out Sledgehammer time. I have 2 lvl 2 bases close by and these will provide up to 100 Land Based Corsairs and P38's/ P47's to support my troops on the ground. Superforts will cloee the AF's and then start round the clock crushing of PZB's forces.

I Get 4 more Superfort Gp soon which will allow greater rotation. In 45 days I will have a force of 5 new or refitted Essex Class Carriers ready to rock I am considering taking the Loooooong way to North Aus you know via Tokyo !!!!

No more messing about.

In addition 11th Airborne is just passing Rabaul on its way north all 3 Bdes will be available for future operations.

If PZB thought he saw Market Garden before just wait until the 3 Airborne Bdes and the rebuilt 503rd gets done with him !!!!!

This is far from over

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 07/01/44

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Kweiyang , at 41,35

Japanese aircraft
D4Y Judy x 24
B6N Jill x 16
Ki-44-IIb Tojo x 36
Ki-61 KAIc Tony x 72

No Japanese losses

Airbase hits 1
Runway hits 62

Aircraft Attacking:
32 x Ki-44-IIb Tojo bombing at 2000 feet
32 x Ki-61 KAIc Tony bombing at 2000 feet
36 x Ki-61 KAIc Tony bombing at 2000 feet
21 x D4Y Judy bombing at 2000 feet
14 x B6N Jill bombing at 6000 feet
4 x Ki-61 KAIc Tony bombing at 2000 feet
4 x Ki-44-IIb Tojo bombing at 2000 feet
3 x D4Y Judy bombing at 2000 feet
2 x B6N Jill bombing at 6000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Kweiyang , at 41,35

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zeke x 34
D4Y Judy x 46
B6N Jill x 51
B7A Grace x 44
G4M2 Betty x 21

No Japanese losses


Allied ground losses:
10 casualties reported

Airbase hits 10
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 88

Aircraft Attacking:
18 x G4M2 Betty bombing at 10000 feet
9 x B6N Jill bombing at 12000 feet
27 x B7A Grace bombing at 10000 feet
20 x D4Y Judy bombing at 2000 feet
26 x D4Y Judy bombing at 2000 feet
34 x A6M5 Zeke bombing at 2000 feet
27 x B6N Jill bombing at 10000 feet
17 x B7A Grace bombing at 10000 feet
15 x B6N Jill bombing at 10000 feet
3 x G4M2 Betty bombing at 10000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Wewak , at 52,81


Allied aircraft
B-25J Mitchell x 87


No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
18 casualties reported

Airbase hits 8
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 94

Aircraft Attacking:
30 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 8000 feet
20 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 8000 feet
12 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 8000 feet
6 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 8000 feet
4 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 8000 feet
6 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 8000 feet
4 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 8000 feet
5 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 8000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Hansa , at 53,83


Allied aircraft
B-25J Mitchell x 20


No Allied losses

Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 20

Aircraft Attacking:
20 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 8000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 42,72

Japanese aircraft
B6N Jill x 5
Ki-21 Sally x 6

Japanese aircraft losses
B6N Jill: 1 destroyed, 3 damaged
Ki-21 Sally: 6 destroyed

Allied Ships
AE Pyro, Kamikaze hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
AE Lassen
AR Edmund Randolph, Torpedo hits 1, Kamikaze hits 2, on fire, heavy damage

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x B6N Jill launching torpedoes at 200 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 42,72

Japanese aircraft
Ki-48 Lily x 6

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-48 Lily: 6 destroyed

Allied Ships
AR Benjamin Holt
AR Charles P. Steinmetz

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 41,67

Japanese aircraft
A6M5c Zeke x 4
G4M2 Betty x 6
Ki-21 Sally x 3

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M2 Betty: 6 damaged
Ki-21 Sally: 3 destroyed

Allied Ships
LST LST-27, Kamikaze hits 1, on fire
CA Minneapolis
BB Colorado


Allied ground losses:
74 casualties reported

Aircraft Attacking:
2 x G4M2 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
4 x G4M2 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Kendari , at 33,71


Allied aircraft
Spitfire VIII x 8


No Allied losses

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Lautem , at 33,78


Allied aircraft
P-40N Warhawk x 31


No Allied losses


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Makale

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 4134 troops, 29 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 282

Defending force 7571 troops, 80 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 173


Japanese ground losses:
11 casualties reported
Guns lost 2


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Noemfoor

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 1435 troops, 26 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 620

Defending force 24878 troops, 89 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 437


Japanese ground losses:
10 casualties reported


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Emirau Island

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 40 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 5

Defending force 0 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 0

Allied max assault: 8 - adjusted assault: 10

Japanese max defense: 0 - adjusted defense: 1

Allied assault odds: 10 to 1

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 1027
RE: VICTORY - 8/7/2006 12:17:01 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		What is your assessment of the kamikaze threat? Just how much damage are they doing and how difficult, in your opinion, is it to intercept them?

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1028
RE: VICTORY - 8/7/2006 12:45:43 AM   
ChezDaJez


Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2004
From: Chehalis, WA
Status: offline 		Castor Troy said:

quote:

Biggest problem for me with all those discussions about PDU on/off, pilot training yes/no, replacement rates,... is the fact that PzB has completely increased his plane production. This is in my oppinion something that shouldn´t be done as Japanese.


Aztez said:

quote:

Yeah, all the time we hear that allied replacement rates should be historical and need tweaking. But what about the Japanese? I mean they can outproduce you with good fighters and bombers. Historically that a laughable since they were struggling from mid 1943 onwards.


Hi Castor Troy and Aztez,

I hate to disagree with you but the issue isn't with Japanese production, its with allied production. As Andy said, receiving a bunch of F6F-Ns is stupid when the need is for F6F day fighters. Allied production is tricky because of the two-front war issues. If an allied player could increase B-17 production for example, should the increase all go to the Pacific or should it be distributed according to actual delivery percentages. In other words, if 60% of the production went to Europe, should 60% of the increase go their also? I personally favor a routine that allows the allied player to massage his production but not necessarily increase the total numbers. Massaging it would allow for turning off F6F-N production and diverting it to F6Fs.

One of the issues there is concerning allied production is that theie are no ramping up issues. Typically when a new aircraft enter production, it took awhile to ramp up the numbers. The Japanese have to ramp up their prodcution. The increases are not immediate.

Also, Japanese production should have the ability to increase in the game. Japan produced more aircraft in 1944 than she did in 1941, 1942 and 1945 combined. Here's a breakdown of the aircraft production numbers for Japan from the USSBS:

1941- 5088
1942- 8861
1943- 16693
1944- 28180
1945- 11066

As you can see, Japan produced 55000 aircraft in 1943, 1944 and the first 8 months of 1945. That's an average of over 1700 aircraft a month.

Chez

< Message edited by ChezDaJez -- 8/7/2006 12:53:00 AM >

_____________________________

Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 1029
RE: VICTORY - 8/7/2006 2:25:24 AM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		It would be nice if a particular victory point ratio was reached or a certain level of victory points were reached by the Japanese it would trigger an increase in Allied production (more of their total production going to the Pacific vs the Atlantic). I just don't think the game mechanics would support this. 

_____________________________


(in reply to ChezDaJez)
Post #: 1030
RE: VICTORY - 8/7/2006 2:46:55 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Re posting what I posted in NYGiants thread on main board for info

OK guys I appreciate the thought but with the exception of a few very specific points I would argue not to rely on my game v PZB too much as a guideline for this as it is an outlier.

1. In that particular game I am unable to interdict Chinese training which means PZB has more trained pilots and I am unable to interfere. This is a result of PZB's conquest of India so no complaints from me on this one. (In every other game I play my number 1 strategic objective for the Chinese theatre is to interfere with that training)
2. Hellcat production as I have said several times is 30% of what it should be and this has hamstrung me.

These are not points of Japan being to strong but of the allies being under represented.

1. is an outlier and 2 is a genuine allied complaint.

Now a few points.

As I think I have made clear as the allies I have a philosophical objection to rear area training and I refuse to do it so yes I will be committing 30xp pilots to the front and I expect to lose several carriers as a result to kamikazes thats just the way it is. (I will be forced to use Marines on Carriers in Corsairs soon as well - PZB is aware of this neither of us is happy with it but its the way it is)

In that particular game I have not committed to carrier operations beyond those the allies undertook IRL although I was unable to follow through in the Marianas however I have in the last 4 months destroyed KB twice and I think its a sad day when sinking five fleet carriers is not worth the 200 pilots lost (I would question whether Japanese repair is to good as those carriers were repaired damned quick after the first beating but thats another issue)

If I was to recommend anything it would be 1. fix allied hellcat production and stop those dammed nightfighter variants. 2. USN pilot xp when thepool is empty should be at a floor of 50xp not 30 to reflect trained pilots from the Army or Marines being transferred in and given flight deck training in this way the Japanese still get a benefit from attriting thre USN pool (less 70xp pilots) but the USN does not go into the fight with 30xp pilots.

The example PZB used above I lost 140 USN pilots in one fight so I LOST that engagment. Thats 3 months pilots in one engagement !!!!

I will leave you with a warning in any game where PDU's are ON I do not see how with the current pilot numbers and hellcat production schedule and with the ability of the Japanese to produce tonies and franks to replace oscars and georges and jacks to replace land based zekes how any allied player will be able to avoid using Corsairs on every carrier in 44 from the start of 44 and using Marine pilots to assist with the massive losses the USN will take when it faces 1000 1st class interceptors rather than the dross PZB has been throwing at me.

I genuinely believe it is impossible unless the allies say sod it not going to attack through SWPAC or CENTPAC and go via Burma/Malaya where they can advance under a cloud of LBA - I think in PDU environment all allied player will decide (as I have that the poor nature of Hellcat production and USN pilot pool vulnerability.) that any other course is a waste of time which will get dammed boring for the Japanese players as the Allies dont take risky naval invasions but instead play land war in Asia 100% of the time.

I guess what I am saying is fix the dammed hellcats and either increase USN pilot numbers or increase the floor for untrained pilots or alternatively slow down xp gain and CAP it form supply missions for bombers and ground attack for fighters hard cap it at 55 like other training and slow down the rate of gain!!!

Anyway back to the war

< Message edited by Andy Mac -- 8/7/2006 3:17:59 AM >

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 1031
RE: VICTORY - 8/7/2006 2:48:03 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		To tired to comment on this now I will do it in the morning

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 07/02/44

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack at 47,45

Japanese Ships
AP Shofuku Maru
PC Fumi Maru
PG Heijo Maru

Allied Ships
SS Sterlet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 30 encounters mine field at Manila (43,52)

Japanese Ships
PC PC-7

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Kweiyang , at 41,35

Japanese aircraft
D4Y Judy x 24
B6N Jill x 16
Ki-44-IIb Tojo x 35
Ki-61 KAIc Tony x 72

No Japanese losses

Airbase hits 3
Runway hits 68

Aircraft Attacking:
35 x Ki-44-IIb Tojo bombing at 2000 feet
32 x Ki-61 KAIc Tony bombing at 2000 feet
32 x Ki-61 KAIc Tony bombing at 2000 feet
21 x D4Y Judy bombing at 2000 feet
16 x B6N Jill bombing at 6000 feet
4 x Ki-61 KAIc Tony bombing at 2000 feet
4 x Ki-61 KAIc Tony bombing at 2000 feet
3 x D4Y Judy bombing at 2000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Kweiyang , at 41,35

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zeke x 4
D4Y Judy x 23
B6N Jill x 10
B7A Grace x 27
G4M2 Betty x 25

No Japanese losses


Allied ground losses:
11 casualties reported

Airbase hits 5
Runway hits 40

Aircraft Attacking:
11 x G4M2 Betty bombing at 10000 feet
8 x B6N Jill bombing at 12000 feet
27 x B7A Grace bombing at 10000 feet
20 x D4Y Judy bombing at 2000 feet
4 x A6M5 Zeke bombing at 2000 feet
2 x B6N Jill bombing at 10000 feet
3 x D4Y Judy bombing at 2000 feet
9 x G4M2 Betty bombing at 10000 feet
5 x G4M2 Betty bombing at 10000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Banjarmasin , at 27,64

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft
B-29 Superfortress x 85

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21 Sally: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
B-29 Superfortress: 3 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
21 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

Airbase hits 6
Airbase supply hits 5
Runway hits 31

Aircraft Attacking:
18 x B-29 Superfortress bombing at 10000 feet
8 x B-29 Superfortress bombing at 10000 feet
9 x B-29 Superfortress bombing at 10000 feet
15 x B-29 Superfortress bombing at 10000 feet
3 x B-29 Superfortress bombing at 10000 feet
3 x B-29 Superfortress bombing at 10000 feet
6 x B-29 Superfortress bombing at 10000 feet
4 x B-29 Superfortress bombing at 10000 feet
3 x B-29 Superfortress bombing at 10000 feet
3 x B-29 Superfortress bombing at 10000 feet
3 x B-29 Superfortress bombing at 10000 feet
2 x B-29 Superfortress bombing at 10000 feet
2 x B-29 Superfortress bombing at 10000 feet
3 x B-29 Superfortress bombing at 10000 feet
3 x B-29 Superfortress bombing at 10000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Kendari , at 33,71

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft
Spitfire VIII x 7
Beaufighter Mk 21 x 9

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-57-II Topsy: 3 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
Beaufighter Mk 21: 2 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
11 casualties reported

Airbase hits 5
Runway hits 3

Aircraft Attacking:
9 x Beaufighter Mk 21 bombing at 2000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Sorong , at 42,74


Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 14


Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 1 damaged

Airbase hits 1
Runway hits 2

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
8 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Hollandia , at 49,79


Allied aircraft
Kittyhawk III x 6
P-40N Warhawk x 3
P-47D Thunderbolt x 9
B-25J Mitchell x 21


No Allied losses

Airbase hits 1
Runway hits 13

Aircraft Attacking:
15 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 10000 feet
6 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 10000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Biak , at 46,77


Allied aircraft
Kittyhawk III x 6
P-40N Warhawk x 3
B-25J Mitchell x 13


Allied aircraft losses
B-25J Mitchell: 5 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
11 casualties reported

Airbase hits 2
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 7

Aircraft Attacking:
13 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 10000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Noemfoor , at 45,76


Allied aircraft
P-40N Warhawk x 6
PB4Y Liberator x 8
B-24J Liberator x 51


No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
46 casualties reported

Airbase hits 2
Airbase supply hits 4
Runway hits 49

Aircraft Attacking:
11 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
9 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
3 x PB4Y Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
6 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
6 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
3 x PB4Y Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
2 x PB4Y Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
3 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
3 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
3 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
4 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
3 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
3 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Wotje , at 82,79


Allied aircraft
P-40N Warhawk x 28
P-38J Lightning x 3
A-20G Havoc x 54
B-25J Mitchell x 46
PB4Y Liberator x 24
B-24J Liberator x 82


No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
31 casualties reported

Airbase hits 14
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 72

Aircraft Attacking:
15 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 15000 feet
11 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 15000 feet
20 x A-20G Havoc bombing at 15000 feet
11 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 15000 feet
3 x PB4Y Liberator bombing at 15000 feet
3 x PB4Y Liberator bombing at 15000 feet
8 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 15000 feet
9 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 15000 feet
18 x A-20G Havoc bombing at 15000 feet
11 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 15000 feet
3 x PB4Y Liberator bombing at 15000 feet
3 x PB4Y Liberator bombing at 15000 feet
3 x A-20G Havoc bombing at 15000 feet
6 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 15000 feet
6 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 15000 feet
3 x PB4Y Liberator bombing at 15000 feet
3 x PB4Y Liberator bombing at 15000 feet
11 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 15000 feet
3 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 15000 feet
4 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 15000 feet
3 x A-20G Havoc bombing at 15000 feet
3 x PB4Y Liberator bombing at 15000 feet
3 x PB4Y Liberator bombing at 15000 feet
5 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 15000 feet
3 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 15000 feet
3 x A-20G Havoc bombing at 15000 feet
5 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 15000 feet
4 x A-20G Havoc bombing at 15000 feet
3 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 15000 feet
3 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 15000 feet
5 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 15000 feet
3 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 15000 feet
3 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 15000 feet
3 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 15000 feet
3 x A-20G Havoc bombing at 15000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Wewak , at 52,81


Allied aircraft
B-25J Mitchell x 92


No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
20 casualties reported

Airbase hits 7
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 50

Aircraft Attacking:
20 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 8000 feet
29 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 8000 feet
13 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 8000 feet
15 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 8000 feet
5 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 8000 feet
4 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 8000 feet
3 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 8000 feet
3 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 8000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Hansa , at 53,83


Allied aircraft
B-25J Mitchell x 42


No Allied losses

Airbase hits 2
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 49

Aircraft Attacking:
27 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 8000 feet
15 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 8000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Wake Island , at 82,63

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zeke x 24

Allied aircraft
F-5C Lightning x 1
PB4Y Liberator x 2
B-24J Liberator x 2

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5 Zeke: 4 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
PB4Y Liberator: 2 damaged
B-24J Liberator: 2 damaged

Airbase hits 1
Runway hits 2

Aircraft Attacking:
2 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 8000 feet
2 x PB4Y Liberator bombing at 8000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 32nd Ind.Mixed Brigade, at 45,76


Allied aircraft
F4U-1D Corsair x 3
Spitfire VIII x 3
Kittyhawk I x 3
Kittyhawk III x 3
Beaufighter Mk 21 x 18
Beaufort V-IX x 4
F-5C Lightning x 1
A-20G Havoc x 3
B-25J Mitchell x 6
PB4Y Liberator x 4
B-24J Liberator x 30


No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
84 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x Beaufort V-IX bombing at 10000 feet
3 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 10000 feet
3 x Beaufighter Mk 21 bombing at 2000 feet
3 x Beaufighter Mk 21 bombing at 2000 feet
3 x Kittyhawk III bombing at 2000 feet
3 x Beaufighter Mk 21 bombing at 2000 feet
3 x Beaufighter Mk 21 bombing at 2000 feet
3 x Beaufighter Mk 21 bombing at 2000 feet
3 x Beaufighter Mk 21 bombing at 2000 feet
13 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
10 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
3 x A-20G Havoc bombing at 10000 feet
7 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
4 x PB4Y Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
3 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 10000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 1st Amphibious/B Brigade, at 45,76


Allied aircraft
F4U-1D Corsair x 6
Spitfire VIII x 6
Kittyhawk I x 4
Kittyhawk III x 10
Beaufighter Mk 21 x 42
Beaufort V-IX x 4
F-5C Lightning x 1
A-20G Havoc x 6
B-25J Mitchell x 14
PB4Y Liberator x 3
B-24J Liberator x 53


No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
93 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

Aircraft Attacking:
8 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 10000 feet
7 x Beaufighter Mk 21 bombing at 2000 feet
5 x Beaufighter Mk 21 bombing at 2000 feet
10 x Kittyhawk III bombing at 2000 feet
5 x Beaufighter Mk 21 bombing at 2000 feet
5 x Beaufighter Mk 21 bombing at 2000 feet
4 x Beaufort V-IX bombing at 10000 feet
10 x Beaufighter Mk 21 bombing at 2000 feet
10 x Beaufighter Mk 21 bombing at 2000 feet
13 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
18 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
6 x A-20G Havoc bombing at 10000 feet
22 x B-24J Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
3 x PB4Y Liberator bombing at 10000 feet
6 x B-25J Mitchell bombing at 10000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF, near Wasile at 41,69

Japanese aircraft
Ki-21 Sally x 3

Allied aircraft
F4U-1D Corsair x 7
P-38J Lightning x 28

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21 Sally: 3 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
P-38J Lightning: 1 damaged

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 38,63

Japanese aircraft
A6M5c Zeke x 3
G4M2 Betty x 6

Allied aircraft
FM-2 Wildcat x 32
F6F Hellcat x 162
F4U-1D Corsair x 24
Corsair IV x 7

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5c Zeke: 3 destroyed
G4M2 Betty: 2 destroyed, 2 damaged


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF, near Wasile at 41,69

Japanese aircraft
Ki-21 Sally x 4

Allied aircraft
F4U-1D Corsair x 7
P-38J Lightning x 28

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21 Sally: 4 destroyed


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF, near Makale at 32,67

Japanese aircraft
Ki-21 Sally x 3

Allied aircraft
Spitfire VIII x 19

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21 Sally: 3 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
Spitfire VIII: 1 damaged

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF, near Wasile at 41,69

Japanese aircraft
B6N Jill x 12
Ki-21 Sally x 3

Allied aircraft
F4U-1D Corsair x 7
P-38J Lightning x 28

Japanese aircraft losses
B6N Jill: 12 destroyed
Ki-21 Sally: 3 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1D Corsair: 1 damaged
P-38J Lightning: 2 damaged

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 41,70

Japanese aircraft
B6N Jill x 3
Ki-21 Sally x 3

Allied aircraft
P-38J Lightning x 8

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21 Sally: 3 destroyed


Allied Ships
AR Edmund Randolph, Kamikaze hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
AE Pyro, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage

Aircraft Attacking:
3 x B6N Jill launching torpedoes at 200 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 53,61

Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 9
Ki-21 Sally x 12

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21 Sally: 2 damaged

Allied Ships
AK Florence Luckenbach, Bomb hits 1
AK Steel Mariner


Allied ground losses:
17 casualties reported

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x Ki-21 Sally bombing at 5000 feet
4 x Ki-21 Sally bombing at 5000 feet
4 x Ki-21 Sally bombing at 5000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 41,75

Japanese aircraft
Ki-48 Lily x 3

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-48 Lily: 3 destroyed

Allied Ships
AK Empire Rainbow, Kamikaze hits 2, on fire, heavy damage

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF, near Wasile at 41,69

Japanese aircraft
A6M5c Zeke x 5
Ki-21 Sally x 7

Allied aircraft
F4U-1D Corsair x 3
P-38J Lightning x 15

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5c Zeke: 5 destroyed
Ki-21 Sally: 7 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1D Corsair: 2 damaged
P-38J Lightning: 3 damaged


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Makale

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 4123 troops, 29 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 282

Defending force 7582 troops, 77 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 175


Japanese ground losses:
29 casualties reported
Guns lost 1


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Noemfoor

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 1435 troops, 26 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 636

Defending force 24414 troops, 88 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 427



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Emirau Island

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 40 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 5

Defending force 0 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 0

Allied max assault: 8 - adjusted assault: 10

Japanese max defense: 0 - adjusted defense: 1

Allied assault odds: 10 to 1

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1032
RE: VICTORY - 8/7/2006 3:18:29 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5821
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline 		ny59giants,

That sounds like a good idea actually. Of course it isn't at all supported under the current code and is likely to be dismissed as an "embelishment by the current programming team and thus not prioritised for implementation but it sounds like a good idea.

The problem is, of course, that a pure code fix won't be able to differentiate between a Japan which produces lots of airframes and can train pilots for them in China OR a Japan which produces lots of airframes but cannot train its pilots in china ( two entirely different propositions).

As ever it would be best if they could obviate the need for on-map training so that these work-arounds wouldn't be required.

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1033
RE: VICTORY - 8/7/2006 3:19:40 AM   
ChezDaJez


Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2004
From: Chehalis, WA
Status: offline
quote:

As I think I have made clear as the allies I have a philosophical objection to rear area training and I refuse to do it so yes I will be committing 30xp pilots to the front and I expect to lose several carriers as a result to kamikazes thats just the way it is. (I will be forced to use Marines on Carriers in Corsairs soon as well - PZB is aware of this neither of us is happy with it but its the way it is)


Andy, I understand your objection to on-map training in general. However there are historical, real life examples where the US did just that. The Feb 42 Marshall Island raids were basically "training" cruises. There was no significant military purpose for them other than to expose the pilots and ships to combat conditions and to gain a little intell. They were excellent for working out the rough spots. Later in the war, carriers enroute to the front swung by Truk and Rabaul to deliver their greetings. No, on map training on this scale is not gamey and I think you should use it.

The on-map training that I proposed to you was not meant to involve hundreds of aircraft but to prepare a carrier for battle in much the same way the US Navy did IRL. It would be in areas near the front but not necessarily at the front, bases that you have bypassed that can still contitute a threat if PzB so chooses.

Rotating your carriers through this can be beneficial and I don't believe it to be gamey in any way. This is how I often train my airgroups. You won't see me launching massive training raids with hundreds or aircraft but you will see me training the occasional daitai or sentai this way.

Chez

_____________________________

Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1034
RE: VICTORY - 8/7/2006 9:36:13 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Chez I dont ever restrict my Japanese opponents from this but I will in game try to interdict it I understand why Japanese players need it I just choose not to participate in it.

I have no problem with setting up training raids for my carrier pilots once they get to a reasonable training level but a few points to note with that.

1. 3 or 4 days practice (which would be reasonable does not a skilled pilot make that takes 60 - 90 days of continuous rear area bombing)
2. CVR Gps where I have over 1000 pilots cannot use this method as the carriers cannot fly ops so these gps are limited to using low level pilots which will dilute my trained carrier gps.

Basically the CVR's become a danger.

(in reply to ChezDaJez)
Post #: 1035
RE: VICTORY - 8/7/2006 12:35:14 PM   
ChezDaJez


Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2004
From: Chehalis, WA
Status: offline
quote:

2. CVR Gps where I have over 1000 pilots cannot use this method as the carriers cannot fly ops so these gps are limited to using low level pilots which will dilute my trained carrier gps.



I had forgotten that the CVRs won't fly ops. That explains something PzB said.

Anyways, as I said I don't perform large scale training operations on empty bases. I do use isolated units to occasionally sharpen my claws for lselect ow skill groups but they are normally near the front and subject to interdiction (the best kind of training! Please send Buffalos and Wirraways!).

I also do make extensive use of Mogami's training method.

Chez

_____________________________

Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1036
RE: VICTORY - 8/7/2006 1:31:33 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		OK a cunning plan.

CVR's are now a hinderence that I cannot afford as they cannot be trained while the groups are on the ship BUT those big 54 plane wings make perfect navy training schools !!!!.

I am immediatly ordering 8 54 plane TBM and Helldiver Wings off of CVR's to SanFrancisco once there they will commence training missions with the intent of generating a new crop of navy pilots.

Hellcats and the remaining CVR Sqns will perform escort and naval search missions while dismounted with a corpe of experienced pilots as I can reload one group onto each CVR (Basically I am going to be halfing the effectiveness of the CVR's as they cannot be reloaded with both wings) 

(in reply to ChezDaJez)
Post #: 1037
RE: VICTORY - 8/7/2006 1:34:33 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Actually as a test I may split a few wings and set 1 sqn to Training 10% one to training 60% and the last to training 100% and see who gets highest 1st !!!!

Andy

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1038
RE: VICTORY - 8/7/2006 3:16:52 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		Could you propose that your fleet CV's to allowed to carry Hellcats while your CVL's be allowed to carry Corsairs??
This may help alleviate your Hellcat shortage to some extent. If not for this game, but your other one's that are not as far along.


_____________________________


(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1039
RE: VICTORY - 8/7/2006 3:21:40 PM   
Speedysteve

 

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

I'd be careful with taking the CVR squadrons off the carriers. As you say when they get too big it's not possible to get them back on the CVE.

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 1040
RE: VICTORY - 8/7/2006 3:42:39 PM   
saj42


Posts: 1125
Joined: 4/19/2005
From: Somerset, England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

As you can see, Japan produced 55000 aircraft in 1943, 1944 and the first 8 months of 1945. That's an average of over 1700 aircraft a month.

Chez


I don't want to give away too much intel (as I read PzBs AAR too) but I think you will find that that the top 4 Jap fighter production per month EXCEEDS 1700 airframes. So Japan is vastly out producing the US.

All credit to you Andy for surviving this long against the industrial might of Japan (the arsenal of the Axis powers)

_____________________________


Banner by rogueusmc

(in reply to ChezDaJez)
Post #: 1041
RE: VICTORY - 8/7/2006 6:09:27 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Unfortuantely CVR's are now a liability Speedy as I cannot train the 100 or so naval pilots on board and they will replenish my fleet carriers with 30xp pilots and I cannot train them if they stay on board the CVR's.

So I need to stop using them as of now.

Re Japanese production I believe he will be training thousands of aircraft but I dont really care its more VP's for me----(correction I didnt really care)-----my quality was winning out now it is an issue 144 hellcats with 75xp replacement pilots were losing in battles with multi hundred un trained pilots

Now I will be fighting those same battles with 30xp pilots it becomes a straight attrirional war that I CANNOT win.

the USN is officially out of the naval race

Andy

(in reply to saj42)
Post #: 1042
RE: VICTORY - 8/7/2006 6:11:44 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		If anyone has any bright ideas as to how I can survive without trained pilots when I am outproduced in excess of 10:1 in the important aircraft I am happy to hear it.

Anyone ?

(My only option is to start using Marines on my Carriers but I only have 1,000 pilots in the Marine pool so I am not sure how long they will last in this kind of attritional fight either ----- thats what 5 days worth of Marine Pilots)

Andy

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1043
RE: VICTORY - 8/7/2006 7:09:44 PM   
saj42


Posts: 1125
Joined: 4/19/2005
From: Somerset, England
Status: offline 		With my limited knowledge of the finer detail of yours and PzBs production, unfortunately I can't see a solution. He is out-producing you, he is out-training you and he's fighting on his turf. Even if you set up training schools of your own, to be even on pilot quality, he still has that quantitive edge; the current combat model favours the larger formations

_____________________________


Banner by rogueusmc

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1044
RE: VICTORY - 8/7/2006 8:23:31 PM   
ChezDaJez


Posts: 3436
Joined: 11/12/2004
From: Chehalis, WA
Status: offline
quote:

I don't want to give away too much intel (as I read PzBs AAR too) but I think you will find that that the top 4 Jap fighter production per month EXCEEDS 1700 airframes. So Japan is vastly out producing the US.


Hi Tallyho,

I have no idea how many airframes PzB is producing per month but considering that Japan produced over 2300 per month IRL during 1944, the 1700+ that PxB is producing is not out of line HOWEVER the inability of the allied player to optimize his production is. I don't favor allowing the allies to increase production but I do favor allowing the allied player to be able decide what airframes he wants to build. And USN pilot replacements are too low.

Andy,

On map pilot training is a slow process. Setting training to 60% vice 90% (fighters can only train at 90%) will reduce ops losses but slow the training. It takes nearly 90 days to raise a 30 exp pilot to 50 or so. I normally use 50% becuase I can't afford the supplies and the ops losses that occur at 90%. Doesn't do any good to train the pilots if I lose half of them in the process. Training at a size 9/10 base will help reduce the losses.

Your fleet carriers are still a threat to PzB and its a threat that he must respect. He doesn't know which carriers are low on experience. They may have lost a bit of their offensive punch but their defense is still great. The trick is to stay out of range of his better fighters. Let your CAP engage his Zekes when they escort his attacks. Even though your pilot experience is lower than you are used to, it is still sufficient to be effective with the Hellcats just from the sheer size of the CAP. Just don't try any offensive missions where he might have strong fighter forces. Let him come to you. Every Kamikaze strike he launches reduces his pilot pool. If he wants to get a hit he MUST use experienced pilots. One thing you might want to try is using DD/DEs as pickets to absorb kamikaze strikes. Place them just inside his fighter escort range and then LR CAP them while your carriers remain out of range of him. In this way you can train fighter pilots during real operations without exposing the carriers to too much danger.

KB is gone, destroyed. That means PzB's surface forces can no longer operate unless within range of land based fighters. His surface forces are no longer a major threat. They are good now for only kamikaze type missions so his oil production should no longer be a priority target. His resources are what's keeping his air forces in the air. Go after the resources! If you are in range of Tobaoli, bomb it. Thats 900 resources right there. The same with Soerabaja and any other place that produces lots of resources. Resources should be your target now. Put subs off of those ports to interdict the shipping. Without resources, he cannot continue to produce airframes. He may have a large pool of resources in the home islands to continue producing aircrafmes for several months but eventually he will run out. Plus bombing the resources in the SRA reduces his ability to keep the SRA supplied. Without supplies, he can't fly.

Anyways just may thoughts. The USN, even with reduced pilot experience is still formidable. Establishing an airbase on Borneo that allows your LBA to fly from it will have ttremendous effect on his ability to keep resources flowing to the home islands.

Chez

_____________________________

Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98

(in reply to saj42)
Post #: 1045
RE: VICTORY - 8/8/2006 2:27:53 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		No turn tonight so a few data screens




Attachment (1)

(in reply to ChezDaJez)
Post #: 1046
RE: VICTORY - 8/8/2006 2:28:41 AM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		My last crop of pilots and aircraft...the CVR's are empty






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1047
RE: VICTORY - 8/8/2006 12:01:59 PM   
Fishbed

 

Posts: 1822
Joined: 11/21/2005
From: Beijing, China - Paris, France
Status: offline 		Andy, there is no way someone may edit your save and give you a thousand hellcats and transfer a thousand pilots from USAF in the pools? I suppose PzB wouldn't oppose that if it was possible - he'd better fight Hellcats than Corsairs anyway

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1048
RE: VICTORY - 8/8/2006 3:37:39 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Could happen I suppose I doubt PZB would object but I will proceed on the assumption it isnt going to happen in many ways it makes what was already a very interesting game more fun !!!!

44 had the potential to be very boring....not anymore !!!!

(in reply to Fishbed)
Post #: 1049
RE: VICTORY - 8/8/2006 6:38:11 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Still not had a turn from PZB given all the activity on his AAR I suspect something is going on......

If I dont have a turn early tonight I will use the time (after doing my other opponents turns) going through all my carriers and listing frames pilots and average xp just to show the scale of the issue.

I think it will be illuminating

Andy

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 1050
Page:   <<   < prev  33 34 [35] 36 37   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> After Action Reports >> RE: VICTORY Page: <<   < prev  33 34 [35] 36 37   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.344