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: January 9, 1944

 
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: January 9, 1944 Page: <<   < prev  33 34 [35] 36 37   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: January 9, 1944 - 8/24/2008 10:09:49 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		How are your Oil reserves in the Home Islands??
He is getting closer to your major Oil Centers.

Retired Economic Minister Benoit


_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1021
RE: January 9, 1944 - 8/24/2008 10:48:28 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		THAT is my primary concern and why I moved so much into this area.  I have two major convoys that have just left for the Home Islands.  Between them they have 200,000 oil and 200,000 resources.  I cannot let him get any closer or his 4EB will wreak havoc on Palembang.  Considering I just got it mostly repaired, thanks to my Retired Economics Minister, this might be BAD!

With the North Pacific being what it is, I figure HERE is where the Empire will be decided.

Dan only brought 3 Chinese Inf Div with him for the landing.  I have a real chance of holding Medan and then driving him into the sea.  He should have taken Sabang and stayed under LBA Cover.  By being here, I can hit it from 6-8 airfields.  To confuse him, I made sure planes were at Victoria Point to Singapore.  He can't hit all my bases with 4EB and I HOPE to crush the ships at Medan...

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 1022
January 10, 1944 - 8/25/2008 7:01:36 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Medan, Sumatra
My planned aerial assault came off at Medan!  Three Assault Waves hit the two convoys of transports unloading there.  A total of 91 F, 24 DB, 16 TB, 49 Sally/Helen, and 144 Betty dropped their loads on ships that had NO CAP.  Yummy...  When the attacks were over, 15 AK/AP were seriously hit and CA Dorsetshire was SUNK!  Five AKs sank with many more expected to go down.

Dan off-loaded a 4th Chinese Unit there.  I have a Brigade and Engineering Regiment that will be there tomorrow from Kuala.  I have no doubt that I will hold the base.  Two Infantry Divisions at at Singapore and one will be loaded tomorrow to be dropped off at Bankha.

My CVs finished fueling at Batavia and depart on their mission.  BB Yamato and her DDs move out as well.   

North Pacific
I expect my CVs to be in striking range of the convoys that are moving currently.  It appears that there are 2-3 going west and 1-2 coming east.  I added up the aircraft on the 4 CV/4 CVL and got 143 Fighters, 81 DB, and 138 TB.  Good things should come from these planes over the next day or two.

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1023
Bring it to Sabang BABY! - 8/25/2008 9:43:57 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		January 11, 1944

The situation continues with tactical Japanese victories but great fears of strategic defeats.

Northern Japan
I began landing two SNLF units and a Construction Btn at Kunashiri on the 9th.  The Americans did not respond until the 11th.  The Japanese got 7,500 troops ashore before the US Navy showed up.  On the 11th, 9 Japanese AP were attacked by CA Minneapolis, CLAA Oakland, 2 CL, 4 DD, and 4 DE.  The AP scattered and only 4 were sunk.

As I hoped would happen, this battle caused the US TF to use up a bunch of Op points and they were found halfway back to Toyohara during the day.  In the morning a Japanese Aerial Strike of 41 F and 133 B smashed into the Americans.  Unforunately there were no TT in the attack group but the results were excellent:  CA Minneapolis was hit by 8 bombs, CLAA Oakland took 4 bombs, another CL, 2 DD, and 2 DE were heavily hit as well.  One DE sank and there is the real chance for more going down...

I should explain that I am doing these little landings in the Kuiles to distract Dan and make him think I am being more agressive then I actually am.  Taking these bases back is good but I REALLY hope to make him worry about what I might do rather then what I will do.

My Night bombers begin hitting Toyohara in nuisance raids.

Sumatra
Another 5 AK are sunk by Japanese aerial forces as they flee Medan!

That is the good news, however, the bad news is that at least 6-8 Transport TF have been spotted leaving Port Blair and moving SW towards Sabang.  Sabang has an AS of 450 and I can move a Brigade to bump it up another 150 in two days.  Could be very bad...  I begin transporting a Brigade from Singora to Sabang with 45 Transport Planes.

I also begin loading another Japanese Inf Div at Singapore to go to Medan for off-loading.  A second Inf Div will begin to be loaded on the 13th for the same destination. 

Next few turns will be exciting!  

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1024
RE: Bring it to Sabang BABY! - 8/26/2008 4:35:46 PM   
Yakface


Posts: 846
Joined: 8/5/2006
Status: offline 		Hi John

Looking att the picture, you seem to have some 250 to 300 LBA fighters and huge numbers of bombers + whatever your carriers have.  I must be time to unleash that lot on his carriers.  Yes he's got Corsairs, but numbers count a lot in air combat.  The risk of doing nothing, and allowing Allies to get airfields on Sumatra is surely greater than the risks involved in attacking.  If Sumatra falls then the SRA becomes virtually untenable and it's a bit too early for that.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1025
RE: Bring it to Sabang BABY! - 8/27/2008 2:25:09 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		The song goes "Hey-Hey Goodbye..."

Sabang is being crushed by 20 separate Allied units landing.  I've ordered everything to attack (probably get shot down) and do what can be done.  I ordered a fairly suicidal attack so we'll see...

This suits my current mood.  Had a rough Court day and would like to crawl under a rock!


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Yakface)
Post #: 1026
Frustrations - 8/27/2008 5:26:19 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		January 13-14, 1944

OK.  In the name of frustration I will report the last two days in Sumatra.

Going along with Forum advice I released all my planes in the area.  Dan had numerous TF unloading (11-12 of them) at Sabang with his CVs providing distant cover 2 hexes NE of Sabang.  CAP over the town was only 12-19 Allied Fighters.  Considering I had about 600 planes available I expected a decent showing.

Morale was fair to good with all Daitai and Sentai.  I was careful to set ranges to be one hex past sabang to catch whatever I could hit.  On the 14th my CVs were to be in range with 235 more planes that would hit from the SW.

That was the plan.

Then the game took over.

Each day I had less then 100 planes fly.  Each day they elected to attack the CVs which were beyond their set range.  Each day my planes were slaughtered by 70-90 Fighters flying CAP over the Brit CVs.  The Jap CVs decided to fuel on the 14th though I had set the order for them not to.

Long story put simply--nothing--disturbed the Allied landing of 21 units with an Assault Strength of 2,400+.  Sabang fell on the 14th and that should about finish the Japanese position in the western DEI.  Palembang, Singapore, and Batavia will be in range of 4EB. 

Game, Set, Match

Ideas, comments, etc...



_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1027
RE: Frustrations - 8/27/2008 5:28:49 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		That was a depressing posting.  I wrote Dan and told him that I have had a couple of rough days here with the Court stuff and do not have very good morale myself.  I might need some time to rebuild my spirits and then we can get back to it.  This is a case of Real Life intruding on Gaming Life. 

Things certainly look bleak in Sumatra...



_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1028
RE: Frustrations - 8/27/2008 5:52:07 PM   
FeurerKrieg


Posts: 3397
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Denver, CO
Status: offline 		Frustration is part of the deal when you sign on as Japan. :)

In my AAR we just had a carrier battle, and I had 120+ bombers get through CAP to attack Enterprise - I got 2 bomb hits and one of those was a 60kg GP. Not a single Kate torpedo hit. Meanwhile some 50 SBDs (through my CAP) managed to get six hits on my carriers.

_____________________________


Upper portion used with permission of www.subart.net, copyright John Meeks

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1029
RE: Frustrations - 8/27/2008 7:33:25 PM   
anarchyintheuk

 

Posts: 3921
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline 		For whatever reason, the idea that you can flood an area w/ lba AND have it attack in an effective, if not coordinated, manner never seems to work in practice. IIRC, PzB had this happen to him as well (maybe it was Castor Troy). Unfortunately, this just happens to be the backbone of most of Japanese player's defensive strategy.

(in reply to FeurerKrieg)
Post #: 1030
RE: Frustrations - 8/27/2008 9:31:49 PM   
Iridium


Posts: 932
Joined: 4/1/2005
From: Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

For whatever reason, the idea that you can flood an area w/ lba AND have it attack in an effective, if not coordinated, manner never seems to work in practice. IIRC, PzB had this happen to him as well (maybe it was Castor Troy). Unfortunately, this just happens to be the backbone of most of Japanese player's defensive strategy.


Well yeah, what else would all the islands and fortifications that we build up do? I have to ask though, do the players that find their LBA doing this select prefered targets or just hope for the best? Great AAR btw.

_____________________________

Yamato, IMO the best looking Battleship.

"Hey, a packet of googly eyes! I'm so taking these." Hank Venture

(in reply to anarchyintheuk)
Post #: 1031
RE: Frustrations - 8/27/2008 10:14:42 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Thanks Iridium.

I truly wish that you could set attack planes to prioritize targets.  In this case I would toggle AK/AP.  I've watched plane-after-plane go after the CVs and get crushed for nothing.  It is so depressing.

The other major issue I have with the game is that 4EB ALWAYS get to an AF FIRST!  Dan is flying almost 300 4EB out of Moulmein and Rangoon.  They always hit my AFs and destroy numbers of planes on the ground.  Take the two turns when I had perminent land contact with the AK/AP.  Those attack planes of mine would have been in the air the moment sunrise occurred.  The 4EB wouldn't be able to safely leave until the same time.  Should they fight my CAP and crater the AF?  YES!  Should they destroy 40 planes a riad on the ground?  CRAP!

My .02...


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Iridium)
Post #: 1032
RE: Frustrations - 8/28/2008 3:07:28 AM   
vettim89


Posts: 3615
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Toledo, Ohio
Status: offline 		John,

I feel your pain. All of us have felt that frustration. I personally been in both positions while watching the combat replay. At times I have been saying quit bombing the stupid CL's and go after the AP's During the NEI campaign my dutch bombers attacked BB Kongo more then ten times when the Java Sea was full of transport TF. At other times, I have literally sat SCREAMING at the computer, "Go after the carriers, the carriers, you stupid dorks!!!!!!!!"

That said WiTP is a strategic game and as such you role as commander is not to direct individual planes or ships but rather set the operations and general priorites for your units. I might even make the point that as a strategic commander, we have too much control over our units not too little. That said, what makes the game fun is the direction of individual battles at the units level.

_____________________________

"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1033
RE: Frustrations - 8/28/2008 7:11:52 AM   
tabpub


Posts: 1019
Joined: 8/10/2003
From: The Greater Chicagoland Area
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Thanks Iridium.

I truly wish that you could set attack planes to prioritize targets.  In this case I would toggle AK/AP.  I've watched plane-after-plane go after the CVs and get crushed for nothing.  It is so depressing.

The other major issue I have with the game is that 4EB ALWAYS get to an AF FIRST!  Dan is flying almost 300 4EB out of Moulmein and Rangoon.  They always hit my AFs and destroy numbers of planes on the ground.  Take the two turns when I had perminent land contact with the AK/AP.  Those attack planes of mine would have been in the air the moment sunrise occurred.  The 4EB wouldn't be able to safely leave until the same time.  Should they fight my CAP and crater the AF?  YES!  Should they destroy 40 planes a riad on the ground?  CRAP!

My .02...


Hi,
No, it's not that crappy, really.
A. Your airbase is a known target
B. I don't know the current ground picture, but Rangoon is a major AF and probably well in his rear now I imagine; so, they can take off pre-dawn with lighted strips and be over target as the sun rises. It's merely an exercise in navigation to get there on time.
C. meanwhile, your naval strike aircraft wait for the search a/c to locate/confirm the targets. If they didn't, they might fly off to hit a patch of open sea.

If it did not work that way, imagine the amount of sorties wasted and the resulting confusion that would occur. Not much to do about it other than counter-striking his AF if possible, perhaps by night or pray that his AF is socked in with weather or vice versa.

_____________________________

Sing to the tune of "Man on the Flying Trapeze"
..Oh! We fly o'er the treetops with inches to spare,
There's smoke in the cockpit and gray in my hair.
The tracers look fine as a strafin' we go.
But, brother, we're TOO God damn low...

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1034
RE: Frustrations - 8/28/2008 8:06:14 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

For whatever reason, the idea that you can flood an area w/ lba AND have it attack in an effective, if not coordinated, manner never seems to work in practice. IIRC, PzB had this happen to him as well (maybe it was Castor Troy). Unfortunately, this just happens to be the backbone of most of Japanese player's defensive strategy.



I´m used to it too but I had my game against PzJg Hortlund end because he thought that if he sets 500 ac on attack and only 300 attack then it´s a bug.

While you usually get nearly 100% of your ac attack an airfield or port you never get 100% attacking an LCU and nearly never see huge coordinated strikes against naval targets. If you see them, then they probably go after a couple of AKs. It´s not just a Japanese thing though.

_____________________________


(in reply to anarchyintheuk)
Post #: 1035
RE: Frustrations - 8/28/2008 8:10:13 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tabpub


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Thanks Iridium.

I truly wish that you could set attack planes to prioritize targets.  In this case I would toggle AK/AP.  I've watched plane-after-plane go after the CVs and get crushed for nothing.  It is so depressing.

The other major issue I have with the game is that 4EB ALWAYS get to an AF FIRST!  Dan is flying almost 300 4EB out of Moulmein and Rangoon.  They always hit my AFs and destroy numbers of planes on the ground.  Take the two turns when I had perminent land contact with the AK/AP.  Those attack planes of mine would have been in the air the moment sunrise occurred.  The 4EB wouldn't be able to safely leave until the same time.  Should they fight my CAP and crater the AF?  YES!  Should they destroy 40 planes a riad on the ground?  CRAP!

My .02...


Hi,
No, it's not that crappy, really.
A. Your airbase is a known target
B. I don't know the current ground picture, but Rangoon is a major AF and probably well in his rear now I imagine; so, they can take off pre-dawn with lighted strips and be over target as the sun rises. It's merely an exercise in navigation to get there on time.
C. meanwhile, your naval strike aircraft wait for the search a/c to locate/confirm the targets. If they didn't, they might fly off to hit a patch of open sea.

If it did not work that way, imagine the amount of sorties wasted and the resulting confusion that would occur. Not much to do about it other than counter-striking his AF if possible, perhaps by night or pray that his AF is socked in with weather or vice versa.



In WITP you don´t have the "one side´s aircraft are over the airfield BEFORE the other side´s aircraft". Everything happens simualtenously. The reason your ac get bombed on the ground is that they didn´t fly at all, not because they were ordered to fly (by the game engine, not by you) and the enemy bombed the airfield before they took off. The engine didn´t send them out on nav attack, so they get bombed.

_____________________________


(in reply to tabpub)
Post #: 1036
RE: Frustrations - 8/28/2008 1:48:01 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Good points and discussion guys.

I would like to see some for of an intiative and/or random roll to see IF your planes could get in the air before a strike came in.  In WitP you are guarantted that your planes are ALWAYS caught on the ground if your base is targeted.  I remember the old Avalon Hill game Flattop where you wanted initiative to get your most important strike in the air prior to the enemy's coming in.

Tabpub--if we are looking at realism, tell me how a flight of B-24 could take off from Rangoon, fly at least 600 miles, and hit Georgetown PRIOR to that base getting a strike in the air for a target less then 180 miles away?  This is why some form of initiative roll would be nice.

Wonder if there is any chance for AE to do something about this?  Doubt it...


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 1037
RE: Frustrations - 8/28/2008 2:17:46 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

In WitP you are guarantted that your planes are ALWAYS caught on the ground if your base is targeted. 

Wonder if there is any chance for AE to do something about this?  Doubt it...



I share your frustration John as a JFB playing in early 1944. But I have to agree with Castor, your planes are not always caught on the ground. If they take off for a mission, the Allies will bomb nothing. This has happened to me many times, though typically when the bombers are on airfield attack or a mission where they are more likely to take off with a full strike.

You may know this, but AE does address the Allied intelligence advantage with regard to seeing Japanese aircraft movements before the turn and being able to react (or to completely surprise Japan). That is an unrealistic situation that will be closed apparently.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1038
RE: Frustrations - 8/28/2008 2:19:13 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		THAT is nice to hear!

Post 2000! Wow...how is that possible?

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 1039
RE: Frustrations - 8/29/2008 8:29:54 PM   
USSAmerica


Posts: 18715
Joined: 10/28/2002
From: Graham, NC, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

January 13-14, 1944

The Jap CVs decided to fuel on the 14th though I had set the order for them not to.


Ideas, comments, etc...




Hi John, still following along and greatly enjoying your game!

Just a comment about this item. Everything I've read indicates that the "Do Not Refuel" setting for a TF only applies to refueling at a base. There is no way to prevent a TF from refueling the escorts from it's capital ships at sea. The only way to really get around this is to set a destination outside attack range of the enemy, and then manually order your TF to refuel the escorts, before you count on them to be ready for combat action.

_____________________________

Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me


Artwork by The Amazing Dixie

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1040
RE: Frustrations - 8/29/2008 9:08:33 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: USS America


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

January 13-14, 1944

The Jap CVs decided to fuel on the 14th though I had set the order for them not to.


Ideas, comments, etc...




Hi John, still following along and greatly enjoying your game!

Just a comment about this item. Everything I've read indicates that the "Do Not Refuel" setting for a TF only applies to refueling at a base. There is no way to prevent a TF from refueling the escorts from it's capital ships at sea. The only way to really get around this is to set a destination outside attack range of the enemy, and then manually order your TF to refuel the escorts, before you count on them to be ready for combat action.



exactly what USS America says!

_____________________________


(in reply to USSAmerica)
Post #: 1041
RE: Frustrations - 8/29/2008 10:17:36 PM   
anarchyintheuk

 

Posts: 3921
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline 		IIRC changing your rtb destination to a closer one can help as well.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 1042
RE: Frustrations - 9/2/2008 3:40:54 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Despite my protestations, Dan thinks I have lost interest in the game.  This is driving me nuts.  If I wanted out I would simply say so and hand the campaign off to anther player like I did with Mandrake.

I have 3 weeks until I find out about my Sentencing and since there is still a chance I could be yanked out of my home, I am spending as much time with my family as possible.  Had the joy of putting in a sprinkler system yesterday and today.  I am sore!  The renewed priorities has necessitated slowing down our campaign. 

We just finished the 1/16/1944 turn and I will do an update tomorrow morning.  I still have all my economic notes as well for posting since I know Michael and Damian are curious! 


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to anarchyintheuk)
Post #: 1043
December Production and VP - 9/2/2008 3:54:08 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		FINALLY!  Here is December's Production and VP Information.  As soon as I get January's done it will be posted behind this one:

December 1, 1943
Victory Points and Economic Summary
 
Victory Points:
 
Score
Japan   43,118  (Up 2 Points)
Allies   25,640  (Up 1,284 Points)
 
This month has had a lot of notes lost to the crazy December that followed.
 
Ships Sunk
Japan   487—4,648 VP (up 95)—I lost 14 ships sunk during November.  
 
Major Japanese Vessels Sunk to Date---CV Junyo and Hiyo, BB Fuso and Yamashiro, BC Kirishima and Haruna, 5 CA , 9 CL, 49 DD, and 30 SS (24 I-Boats and 6 Ro-).
 
Allies   777---9,176 VP (up 174)---Dan lost a total of 21 ships for the month of November. 
 
Major Allied Vessels Sunk---CVs Enterprise, Lexington, Hornet, Wasp and Intrepid, CVL Langley, 1 CVE, BBs Colorado, West Virginia, Idaho, Tennessee, Arizona, Prince of Wales and Alabama, 11 CA, 7 CL, 50 DD, and 22 SS.
 
 
 
 
Manchukuo Garrison---8,028---Down 54---(8,000 Needed)
Political Points---267
 
Units Transferred: 
No notes but I remember transferring a China Division to 4th Fleet
 
Industrial Report
Supply             2,315,431
Fuel                 1,005,051
Manpower       832 (1,348,457)
Heavy Industry           15,181 (236,170)
Resources        19,299 (2,088,132)
Oil                   2,323 (370,900)
 
HI increase went from 180,000 to 236,000!  Thanks everyone for the help.  Repaired 53 Oil Centers.
 
Shipyards
Naval               1,366 (1,995)
Merchant         981 (6)
Repair              1,508
 
Carriers
Katsuragi (121 Days)--Accelerated
Kasagi (476 Days)
Aso (519 Days)
Ikoma (526 Days)   
Ibuki (481 Days)
 
BB Musashi completed
 
 
Weapons
Armament       572 (58,046)
Vehicles          179 (10,917)
 
 
Aircraft
Engines           2,250
Assembly        1,477+(173-Rd)
 
Engines increased by 70 and production dropped some with airframes as I shift research into the big 1944 planes I need.
 
 
Engine Production
Mitsubishi       711 (69)—Need 597—1,673 in Pool
Nakajima         1,199—Need 988---1,037 in Pool
Kawasaki        260---Need 258---194 in Pool
Aichi               80---Need 98---193 in Pool
 
Pools are increasing in both Mitsubishi and Nakajima.
 
Plane Production
Fighters           Planes/Month (in Pool)
A6M2              0 (193)
A6M3              0 (61)
A6M3a            0 (230)
Oscar               0 (205)
Oscar IIa         0 (173)
Tojo                 0 (139)             Shut down this plane’s production.
Tony                0 (117)
Jack                 174 (564)
A6M5c            50 (132)
A6M5              269 (2)
Oscar III         22 (102)
Ki-61 Tony      258 (95)
N1K1 George 52 (2)
Frank 1a          57-Rd (08/44)
Frank 1c          19-Rd (12/44)
 
Am shifting around a lot of airframes as I have groups training in China and elsewhere and then redeploying into the fights.
 
 
Bombers
Betty               0 (473)
Betty 2                        74 (5)
Frances            103 (44)
Sally                0 (123)
Helen               84 (43)
Peggy              62-Rd (9/44)   Production moves forward one month.
Lily                  40 (96)
Nick-a             10 (0)
Nick-b             12 (0)
Val                  0 (547)
Kate                0 (280)
Judy                98 (9)
Jill                    103 (20)
Grace               (6/44)
 
Frances kicks into strong production.  Thankfully I had overproduced so many Betty, Val, and Kate to reconstitute various airgroups.
 
Recon/Float
Emily   20 (6)
Alf       0 (13)
Pete     0  (74)
Pete A 0  (54)
Rufe    23 (20)
Glen    4 (41)
Dinah  0 (13)
Irving-R 35 (89)
Irving-S 23 (22)
Jake     0 (70)
Babs    0 (0)
Dinah-3 39 (4)
 
I was running at a significant shortfall for recon planes of all sorts but that begins to correct itself this month.
 
 
Transports
Tina     0 (42)
Sally    0 (1)
Topsy  7 (16)
Mavis-L 5 (11)
Tabby 0 (83)


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1044
January 1944 Production and VP - 9/2/2008 8:58:58 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		...and the most recent month...

Damian and Michael--Take a look and let me know what you think on the economics. 

My naval losses in DDs is HORRIFIC!  I have accelerated any DD under 125 Days to get them in as fast as possible.

January 1, 1944
Victory Points and Economic Summary
 
Victory Points:
 
Score
Japan   48,641  (Up 5,533 Points)
Allies   31,920  (Up 6,280 Points)
 
A monstrous slugfest over Northern Japan raged for the entire month.  These totals include the recapture of Sapporo but not the elimination of American forces in Hokkaido.  The changes in numbers is staggering for a 31 day period of time!
 
Ships Sunk
Japan   575—6,422 VP (up 1,674)—I lost 88 ships sunk during December.  Naval losses in destroyers is TERRIBLE.  These were my losses:  CV Hiryu, CVL Chiyoda, BB Nagato, Mutsu, and Musashi, 2 CL, 36 DD, 5 SS, 5 PC, 5 MSW, 18 AK, 7 AP, and 6 ML.
 
Major Japanese Vessels Sunk to Date---CV Junyo, Hiyo, and Hiryu, BB Fuso, Yamashiro, Mutsu, Nagato, and Musashi, BC Kirishima and Haruna, 5 CA , 11 CL, 85 DD, and 35 SS.
 
Allies   1,052---12,271 VP (up 3,095)---Dan lost an amazing 275 ships for the month of December!  Exact Losses are staggering:  CVE Altamaha, Copahee, Prince William, Liscome Bay, BB Oklahoma, North Carolina, Mississippi, CA Astoria, Chester, CL Juneau, 15 DD, 10 SS, 4 DE, 175 AK, 11 LCI, 8 MSW, 17 AP, 4 LSD, 43 LST, 14 AO, 2 AV, 1 AS, 2 AR, 1 AD, 1 APD, 25 LCT, 1 AGP, 1 TK, and 1 LCM 
 
Major Allied Vessels Sunk---CVs Enterprise, Lexington, Hornet, Wasp and Intrepid, CVL Langley, 5 CVE, BBs Colorado, West Virginia, Idaho, Tennessee, Arizona, Prince of Wales, Alabama, Oklahoma, North Carolina, Mississippi, 13 CA, 8 CL, 65 DD, and 32 SS.
 
 
 
 
Manchukuo Garrison---9,087---Up 1,059---(8,000 Needed)
Political Points---274
 
Units Transferred: 
Numerous Infantry Units to 4th Fleet
 
 
Industrial Report
Supply             2,364,451
Fuel                 906,842
Manpower       756 (1,384,120)
Heavy Industry           15,100 (277,710)
Resources        18,885 (2,135,292)
Oil                   2,371 (522,843)
 
HI continued to increase from 236,000 to 277,000.  I repaired 48 Oil Centers as well.  The impact of losing Sapporo and Sakhalin wasn’t near as great as I feared it might be.
 
Shipyards
Naval               1,366 (20)
Merchant         981 (0)
Repair              1,439
 
Carriers           All CVs are accelerated.
Katsuragi (59 Days)
Kasagi (414 Days)
Aso (457 Days)
Ikoma (464 Days)   
Ibuki (419 Days)
 
Finished a CL and 9 DD last month.
 
 
Weapons
Armament       572 (49,058)
Vehicles          179 (9,986)
 
 
Aircraft
Engines           2,139
Assembly        1,535+(232-Rd)
 
Engines dropped some due to the Allied attack but they will recover quickly.  Research climbed 70 points as the 1944 planes begin to get more attention.
 
 
Engine Production
Mitsubishi       600 (20)—Need 637—1,552 in Pool
Nakajima         1,199—Need 1,041---1,191 in Pool
Kawasaki        260---Need 258---198 in Pool
Aichi               80---Need 98---174 in Pool
 
Mitsubishi took a serious hit with the loss of Sapporo but is now rebuilding.
 
Plane Production
Fighters           Planes/Month (in Pool)
A6M2              0 (77)
A6M3              0 (0)
A6M3a            0 (73)
Oscar               0 (190)
Oscar IIa         0 (173)
Tojo                 0 (78)               Shut down this plane’s production.
Tony                0 (25)
Jack                 174 (393)
A6M5c            59 (189)
A6M5              283 (0)
Oscar III         32 (42)
Ki-61 Tony      258 (13)
N1K1 George 52 (32)
Frank 1a          82-Rd (08/44)
Frank 1c          33-Rd (12/44)
A6M8              2-Rd (06/45)
 
Am shifting around a lot of airframes as I have groups training in China and elsewhere and then redeploying into the fights.
 
 
Bombers
Betty               0 (476)
Betty 2                        74 (25)
Frances            118 (65)
Sally                0 (0)
Helen               84 (72)
Peggy              77-Rd (9/44)   One month early.
Lily                  40 (117)
Nick-a             10 (0)
Nick-b             12 (0)
Val                  0 (465)
Kate                0 (129)
Judy                98 (19)
Jill                    103 (25)
Grace               (6/44)
 
Frances continues to increase production.  Bombers still look solid and I have large reserves of Naval Bombers.  Army Bombers are a bit more shaky…
 
Recon/Float
Emily   20 (14)
Alf       0 (3)
Pete     0  (99)
Pete A 0  (39)
Rufe    23 (18)
Glen    4 (45)
Dinah  0 (2)
Irving-R 24 (73)
Irving-S 23 (35)
Jake     0 (63)
Babs    0 (0)
Dinah-3 52 (5)
C6N Myrt 14-Rd (03/44)
 
Continue having issues keeping up my Recon planes!
 
Transports
Tina     0 (18)
Sally    0 (1)
Topsy  14 (3)
Mavis-L 5 (10)
Tabby 0 (74)
 
I have lost a bunch of Transports this month and have to replenish them.  I may reinstitute some production to build these back up to decent levels.
 
 
 
 


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1045
RE: January 1944 Production and VP - 9/3/2008 2:52:42 AM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline 		What kind of DD's do you have left?  You should have somewhere around 60 or so still.  How many of those are Special Types (Fubuki and higher), vs. the old fleet DD's (Kamikaze, Minekaze, Mutsukis) which are semi-useful depending on role, and the small/old DD's (Momi, Ootori, Tomozuru, Wakatake), that are really mostly ASW escorts?

If your 60 left are mostly older, you are REALLY in a bind.  It helps if they are alot of newer ones. 

The IJN starts with 21 2nd class DDs (Ootori etc), 34 old fleet DDs, and 69 Special Types.  You probably have built about 7 Akizukis, and maybe 15 more Yugumo/Kageros. 

One of the interesting things playing Japan is you have to learn to use limited resources.  With the DD's, you really have to assign missions that play to their capabilities.


_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1046
RE: January 1944 Production and VP - 9/3/2008 6:43:39 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Q-Ball poses a set of good questions and thoughts.  To answer some of them:  I have lost most of my 2nd and 3rd rate DDs but the attrition has been so bad that my modern DDs are just too few in number.  I must have 15-20 repairing in Home Island ports as well.

My cruisers are in fine shape as well as my CVs, however, I am down 5 BB/BC now with 3 heavily damaged getting repaired.  The Fleet is a disaster.  I can still field a respectable force but really feel constrained...



_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 1047
RE: January 1944 Production and VP - 9/3/2008 1:49:10 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		You can send me a recent turn so I can plug it into Tracker (I'll have to upgrade it to the latest version first) and post some screenshots. it will make it easy to make comments from there. 

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1048
RE: January 1944 Production and VP - 9/3/2008 5:14:35 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Great idea.  I will send you a copy of the turn as soon as I get it from Dan.  Look around for pools of resources and oil.  I think I have been doing really well picking all that up but could always use help and suggestions...


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 1049
RE: January 1944 Production and VP - 9/4/2008 1:49:13 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		I've put back on my Economics Minister's hat for a day. Here is a list of Resources within the empire.

John - you have only 14k worth of supply at Balikpapan to continue repairs of your Oil Centers. That is only 4 or 5 days worth. You will need to send some supply there.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
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: January 9, 1944 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

1.188