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: US Carriers clash with KB...

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: US Carriers clash with KB... Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: US Carriers clash with KB... - 8/11/2009 11:40:46 AM   
drizzt73


Posts: 38
Joined: 9/15/2005
Status: offline 		Great AAR so far, I look forward to following with interest, too bad about the CV's though. I just started a PBEM as the allies against my brother so will hopefully learn a few tricks from you.

cheers

_____________________________


(in reply to jrlans)
Post #: 61
RE: US Carriers clash with KB... - 8/11/2009 2:41:52 PM   
devoncop


Posts: 1304
Joined: 7/17/2006
Status: offline 		Hi..

Ouch, that was a big blow to the carriers and I agree that Enterprise looks doomed!

Off the Philippines the principle of conducting fighter "sweeps" rather than just standard escorts or air to air missions seems to be coming across more and more and the relative failure of the P40E's to disrupt the landings again emphasises this.What the landings also show is that the patrol boats can certainly relied upon in the right conditions to at least cause some annoyance to Tojo.

At least you got a bonus by skilfully extricating Force Z which will be a worry for the the Jap commanders (I like to look on the bright side)

Good decision to send Percival back to his croquet lawns and Bridge tournaments as I doubt he would know one end of a rifle from the other

Best wishes
Ian


_____________________________

"I do not agree with what you say, but I shall defend to the death your right to say it"

(in reply to drizzt73)
Post #: 62
RE: US Carriers clash with KB... - 8/11/2009 3:28:34 PM   
offenseman


Posts: 768
Joined: 2/24/2007
From: Sheridan Wyoming, USA
Status: offline 		I've remained a lurker for YEARS because my knowledge of history and WITP is poor compared to so many other here that I felt silly adding commentary. However, now that AE is new and many of us are at the same level in it, perhaps I will be a more frequent contributor.

This is a good AAR and I am going to stay on top of it.  Thanks for doing it!


(in reply to devoncop)
Post #: 63
RE: US Carriers clash with KB... - 8/11/2009 3:54:25 PM   
devoncop


Posts: 1304
Joined: 7/17/2006
Status: offline 		Offenseman,

The great things about these forums in general is that most people on them are very helpful and non judgemental and also that they are totally international. I am sure your knowledge of English is 1000 times better than my knowledge of your language so dont worry about that.

Secondly, although there are several very well informed people on here and i love reading stuff like Mike Solli's stuff on specific airframe and engines ......many are like myself and maybe you who are facsinated by the history and the epic nature of the conflict and look to AE to help us experience a bit of it.

(Sorry for going a bit O/T but the beuaty of this AAR is that it is written in such an accessible way to those of is who aren't as knowledgable as others but want to learn!!!

Cheers
Ian

_____________________________

"I do not agree with what you say, but I shall defend to the death your right to say it"

(in reply to offenseman)
Post #: 64
RE: US Carriers clash with KB... - 8/11/2009 4:43:39 PM   
SuluSea


Posts: 2358
Joined: 11/17/2006
Status: offline 		Good looking AAR, best of luck!

_____________________________

"There’s no such thing as a bitter person who keeps the bitterness to himself.” ~ Erwin Lutzer

(in reply to devoncop)
Post #: 65
RE: US Carriers clash with KB... - 8/11/2009 5:47:39 PM   
Rob Brennan UK


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

ORIGINAL: offenseman

I've remained a lurker for YEARS because my knowledge of history and WITP is poor compared to so many other here that I felt silly adding commentary. However, now that AE is new and many of us are at the same level in it, perhaps I will be a more frequent contributor.

This is a good AAR and I am going to stay on top of it.  Thanks for doing it!




Welcome to AE .. and don't worry about any percieved 'lack of knowledge' . most of the
folk here are only to willing to help out and give friendly advice. so if you are stumped
over anything just post a thread.. we all learn a lot about the pacific war each day
here.

P.s back OT aztez .. as many others have said great looking AAR .. no pesky cut n paste

_____________________________

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

(in reply to offenseman)
Post #: 66
RE: US Carriers clash with KB... - 8/11/2009 7:42:53 PM   
aztez

 

Posts: 4031
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline 		jrlans: Ouch indeed. The good news is that Big E is still afloat. The flooding has been stabilazed. She is moving agonazingly slow though. Soon it will have an 4 DD + 2 DMS ships escorting. Too early to tell whether she will survive though.

Few planes diverted into Johnston Island. I assume that 90% of the aircraft was lost though.

You are correct. CV Yorktown is arriving soon but I really need to be careful when and where to commit my naval forces. An head collision with KB is not what I want now. Though if he split these ships than that is an diffrent story alltogether.

drizzt73: Welcome and thank you. I did learn a lot from more experienced guys when I started Witp. Few things what to do and a lot what NOT to do.

devoncop: Yeah. The sweep missions caused harm but I did upgrade some squadron leaders which helped a bit too. We shall see how things play out in skies above Luzon. RAF is having tough time with these sweeps at Singapore though.

Force Z is safe. I doubt he can intercept unless Japanese have space ships!!!

Percival.. oh well he is growing bananas in some deserted DEI island last I heard.

offenseman: Basically what devoncop & Rob said. These forums are nice and "quiet". It is an contrast to many other ones.

You really should not feel bad about the knowledge regarding WW2 Pacific history. I did read it before I joined but the game has taught me a lot. Actually have couple of books on the subject now. There are people here that propably know every soldiers foot size that even remotely entered service but... well nothing to embarrased about.

Agreed. This is basic AE with formatting the Witp knowledge sametime.

SuluSea: Thank you and welcome. I guess eventhough all the AAR's are for your opponents honour it feels good know people are reading. These things take time to keep updated.

Rob: Shall we see you in action soon too?

(in reply to Rob Brennan UK)
Post #: 67
RE: US Carriers clash with KB... - 8/11/2009 7:43:48 PM   
aztez

 

Posts: 4031
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline 		China (december 11th & 12th)

I think Dave has read map pretty much the same way as I planned operations.

In this case an picture speaks thousand words. (see below)

Yellow box = Chine offensive target
Light blue arrow = Chinese units movement
Red Box = Japanese reinforcements
Red arrow = Japanese movement
Purple box = Heavy lba offensives by IJA
Green box = IJN BB bombardments
Turcose = Low garrison levels at Wuchow.
Black box = Chinese bombers conduct ground offensives.

I see couple of things developing here. IJA is moving 10-12 units into Ichang. So, our offensive is propably going stall from the start. Not all of those units are combat ones but I would guess he has some 1000av points there soon, I will try to take the city but I'am not too optimistic.

However Siayang offensive might succeed. I think Dave made an decision between Ichang and Siayang and chose first one. The reason are quite obvious ones why he did it.

In support of Ichang IJA is conducting heavy bombing runs againts Changhsa. Very nice idea and it certainly worth the effort due to Chinese poor fighters.

Lanchow and Wuchow are still not garrisoned properly. I'am moving troops in both cities but it is painfully slow progress. Just remember to turn OFF the repairs.

The most odd thing is that IJN conducted naval bombardments againts Wenchow, It even included an BB Yamashiro. That is fine by me I'am moving infantry units out of the city already.







Attachment (1)

< Message edited by aztez -- 8/11/2009 8:06:20 PM >

(in reply to aztez)
Post #: 68
RE: US Carriers clash with KB... - 8/11/2009 7:45:01 PM   
aztez

 

Posts: 4031
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline 		Philippines (december 11th and 12th)

First the US submarines launched punch of torpedoes and hit enemy AK's. I think their accuracy was below 10%. The bright side is that "remain in station" + "max react 6" at least started to things I wanted. I haven't set them on any patrol courses at least not yet.

There was an huge suprise though. Enemy carriers launched an airstrike againts Luzon. Definately an suprise I really wasn't expecting it. Than again I like since I have 4 DD's hiding in Lingayen with full ammo load. These ships should be able intercept CVE Hosho TF at night. Now we just need a little bit of luck!

IJA Zero's kept sweeping Clark Field and Manila. This time around we put up an fight with P40E's and shot down few of them. The PP spent upgrading squadron leaders paid off.

B17's flew few naval strike missions but failed to hit anything. That is an achievement by itself since region is "target rich".

Allied search planes found heavily escorted enemy TF's nearing Luzon from north. These will either move into Vigan or land at Lingayen, Allied signit tells that at least 2 tank brigades are coming in very shortly.

Too bad our mines seem to be malfunctioning at Aparri and Vigan. No hits reported.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to aztez)
Post #: 69
RE: US Carriers clash with KB... - 8/11/2009 7:46:13 PM   
aztez

 

Posts: 4031
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline 		Borneo (december 11th and 12th)

Dave did what expected. Too bad my surface combat TF did not intercept these enemy ships before they unleashed their "revenge".

Several allied transports where slaughtered Samarinda. I did make an cut and paste to show what happened.


Day Time Surface Combat, near Sangihe at 76,96, Range 21,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
CA Haguro
CA Nachi
CL Nagara
DD Yukikaze
DD Tokitsukaze
DD Yamakaze
DD Kawakaze
DD Umikaze
DD Suzukaze
DD Shiokaze

Allied Ships
xAKL Luzon, Shell hits 8, and is sunk
xAKL Magallanes, Shell hits 4, and is sunk



Maximum visibility in Partly Cloudy Conditions: 30,000 yards
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 21,000 yards
Japanese launch Long Lance torpedoes at 21,000 yards before allies detect Japanese presence
CA Nachi launches Long Lance Torpedoes at xAKL Magallanes at 21,000 yards
CL Nagara launches Long Lance Torpedoes at xAKL Luzon at 21,000 yards
Range closes to 18,000 yards
CA Haguro engages xAKL Luzon at 18,000 yards
Range closes to 15,000 yards
CA Nachi engages xAKL Luzon at 15,000 yards
CA Haguro engages xAKL Luzon at 15,000 yards
xAKL Luzon sunk by DD Yukikaze at 15,000 yards
Range closes to 14,000 yards
CA Nachi engages xAKL Magallanes at 14,000 yards
Range closes to 12,000 yards
xAKL Magallanes sunk by CA Nachi at 12,000 yards
Combat ends with last Allied ship sunk...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Tandjoengselor at 69,95, Range 1,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
CA Haguro
CA Nachi
CL Nagara
DD Yukikaze
DD Tokitsukaze
DD Yamakaze
DD Kawakaze
DD Umikaze
DD Suzukaze
DD Shiokaze

Allied Ships
xAK Governor Wright, Shell hits 18, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
xAK Ravnaas, Shell hits 12, and is sunk



Low visibility due to Rain with 35% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Rain and 35% moonlight: 1,000 yards
Range closes to 3,000 yards...
Range closes to 1,000 yards...
CA Nachi engages xAK Ravnaas at 1,000 yards
xAK Governor Wright sunk by CA Haguro at 1,000 yards
Range increases to 2,000 yards
xAK Ravnaas sunk by CA Nachi at 2,000 yards
Combat ends with last Allied ship sunk...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Tandjoengselor at 69,95, Range 1,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
CA Haguro
CA Nachi, Shell hits 1
CL Nagara
DD Yukikaze
DD Tokitsukaze
DD Yamakaze
DD Kawakaze
DD Umikaze
DD Suzukaze
DD Shiokaze

Allied Ships
PG Asheville, Shell hits 17, and is sunk
xAK Capillo, Shell hits 7, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
xAK Ethel Edwards, Shell hits 3, Torpedo hits 4, and is sunk



Low visibility due to Rain with 35% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Rain and 35% moonlight: 1,000 yards
Range closes to 2,000 yards...
Range closes to 1,000 yards...
PG Asheville sunk by CA Nachi at 1,000 yards
CA Nachi engages xAK Ethel Edwards at 1,000 yards
xAK Capillo sunk by CA Nachi at 1,000 yards
xAK Ethel Edwards sunk by DD Suzukaze at 1,000 yards
Combat ends with last Allied ship sunk...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Tandjoengselor at 69,95, Range 1,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
CA Haguro
CA Nachi
CL Nagara
DD Yukikaze
DD Tokitsukaze
DD Yamakaze
DD Kawakaze
DD Umikaze
DD Suzukaze
DD Shiokaze

Allied Ships
xAK Taiyuan, Shell hits 8, and is sunk



Reduced visibility due to Rain with 35% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Rain and 35% moonlight: 1,000 yards
Range closes to 3,000 yards...
Range closes to 1,000 yards...
xAK Taiyuan sunk by CA Nachi at 1,000 yards
Combat ends with last Allied ship sunk...


..ok enough of that. Only surface combat ready TF ready to intercept is PT squadron from Balikpapan. These guys should find the enemy on forthcoming night. Fingers crossed they get the job done.

At Soerabaja ABDA submarines are ordered to move out. It is time to block the enemy advance here.

Another thing happening is that minelaying operations are intense. I do expect some landings in DEI soon.

Mini-KB is lurking near Davao and these pilots don't consume torpedoes for nothing. I can confirm that several allied AK transports were hit and sunk.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to aztez)
Post #: 70
RE: US Carriers clash with KB... - 8/12/2009 5:49:27 AM   
jrlans


Posts: 180
Joined: 8/27/2005
From: Los Angeles, CA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: aztez

Few planes diverted into Johnston Island. I assume that 90% of the aircraft was lost though.



More improtant than the planes, is the pilots, though with the agonizingly low replacement rates planes hurt too. I still have not fully figured out the new pilot replacement mechanics as most pilots I pull out are only around 40 xp and need to be trained up on map. However the CV pilots are generaly trained up into the 60s and 70s and without a carrier to opperate from would make a decent garrison force for any island that you dont want to lose.

(in reply to aztez)
Post #: 71
RE: US Carriers clash with KB... - 8/12/2009 5:24:58 PM   
aztez

 

Posts: 4031
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline 		jrlans: The Big E didn't make into Pearl Harbour. It got ambushed by an enemy submarine which put 4 torpedoes into her.

I did withdraw most of the surviving crews into Pearl Harbour. Sad to say that 8/10 pilots are KIA. Not an happy news by any standard.


Borneo (december 14th and 15th)


This is an textbook example how to destroy allied fleet fleeing out of Luzon and other Philippine bases. (See picture)

Dave has deployed two separate TF which contains carriers. One is covering the coast of Borneo and other blocks any escape via Davao coastline. Really not much an allied player can do.

There has been a lot of talk that Japanese carrier bombers are not effective enough well I beg to disagree. I will post the victory screen and it shows the amount of allied ships lost so far. Not a pretty sight.

I did try an PT boat interception last turn but these guys failed to find the enemy. Instead these carriers continued to cause havoc.

The picture also shows that enemy has landed at Davao. I guess erstad will establish an lba base and we shall soon see Betty's flying all over the base. Also IJN entered Miri which will serve as an lba too. Nice pinzer movement and it covers a lot of sea hexes.

I would assume those carriers are withdrawing once these two bases are captured simply because he don't need them here anymore.

Damn it.. I hoped for better luck but Dave is an very skillfull player.









Attachment (1)

(in reply to jrlans)
Post #: 72
RE: US Carriers clash with KB... - 8/12/2009 5:33:52 PM   
aztez

 

Posts: 4031
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline 		Luzon (december 13th and 14th)

It has become quite obvious that the main landing are taking place at Vigan. US submarines are failing miserably. Next turn they will enter the shallow waters in Vigan. Hopefully they can actually hit something here.

The problem with the above idea is that in not an deep ocean hex so these subs are more vulnerable. Well, there are around 10 of them entering Vigan so maybe we get something out of it.

The alarming thing is that IJA has now established 3 separate airbases at Luzon are these are fully operational. US P40E's are trying to put up an resistance in Manila and Clark Field.

One odd thing happened too. I had my fighters on 80% CAP but when the turn arrived the AI had switched them on 100% LRCAP. Go figure.. I guess these guys were protecting allied ships around Luzon.

Oh.. and needless to say we failed to intercept CVE Hosho's TF. No such luck for the allied side.

Those mines that US submarines laid out.. well they were there but only to me cleared by enemy DMS ships. The combat report indicated that in Aparri alone 40 mines were cleared. So, that was not an lucky operation either.

I will post few overall losses pic's next.

The main dilemma now is how to escort allied TF's towards frontlines. US DD's cannot go the distance.








Attachment (1)

(in reply to aztez)
Post #: 73
RE: US Carriers clash with KB... - 8/12/2009 5:35:02 PM   
aztez

 

Posts: 4031
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline 		The victory points screen (14th of december 1941)






Attachment (1)

(in reply to aztez)
Post #: 74
RE: US Carriers clash with KB... - 8/12/2009 5:35:58 PM   
aztez

 

Posts: 4031
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline 		Confirmed ship losses (14th of december 1941)






Attachment (1)

(in reply to aztez)
Post #: 75
RE: US Carriers clash with KB... - 8/12/2009 5:36:56 PM   
aztez

 

Posts: 4031
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline 		Aircraft losses (14th of december 1941)






Attachment (1)

(in reply to aztez)
Post #: 76
RE: US Carriers clash with KB... - 8/13/2009 1:54:32 AM   
Rob Brennan UK


Posts: 3685
Joined: 8/24/2002
From: London UK
Status: offline 		I don't think that mine hits get reported anymore , i.e no secret cameras with the mines , might explain why you didnt see any hits, ask dave just out of curiosity.

As for me playing a game , well I want to understand it first (unlike you im not a complete massochist ) , I did offer littlejoe a game with AE ages ago with me as japan , but untill i can figure out the production theres little point tbh.

Bad luck on the big E .. not so lucky in this war it seems.

If i were you i'd concentrate on re inforcing the south pacific as a priority, and get some men into noumea asap. Allies cant face
japan head on this early so fight defensively and set up bases to try and halt his advance. If japan gets canton and makes it into
a betty base .. EEK !!!

As ever good luck.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to aztez)
Post #: 77
RE: US Carriers clash with KB... - 8/13/2009 9:08:45 AM   
jrlans


Posts: 180
Joined: 8/27/2005
From: Los Angeles, CA
Status: offline 		I agree with Rob on both accounts with 2 CVs under the waves and no old BBs closing down any enemy bases with what you have remaing will be difficult better to not let Dave have what you cant affoard to lose. If you lose Noumea I would honestly be worried about losing all of Austrialia. It is so sparce at the start of the game that if an Indian campeign is diverted there then it could be knocked out of the war.

(in reply to Rob Brennan UK)
Post #: 78
RE: US Carriers clash with KB... - 8/13/2009 5:50:07 PM   
aztez

 

Posts: 4031
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline 		Rob: That would be something! You as an IJN commander!

I'am still having some trouble understanding the loading related mechanics of the game! It has changed quite an bit!

I'am moving troops towards southern pacific! Already some reinforcements are entering Noumea from Oz.

Dave seems to be slowly moving towards Rabaul. I'am somewhat suprised he hasn't landed there yet!

I checked and with next 60 days I should have 3 operational US CV's at my disposal. This time around I'am not going to waste for nothing!

You know.. defensive warfare isn't always easy to adopt when you really want to go offensively.

Oh, and Allied had some good stuff happening last turn! More on this shortly!


jrlans: Hmmm, agreed. I don't want throw out offensive assets for nothing. However I still do have decent surface combat fleet. Even without those BB's.

At the moment I'am not too conserned about Oz. It would be an logistical nightmare to land there. You never know but at the moment I'am trying to keep him busy elsewhere.

As for India. Maybe, I'am very suprised that he haven't moved into Burma yet! That is really odd indeed! This could mean an early DEI offensive for the Japanese side.

(in reply to jrlans)
Post #: 79
BB Ise reported sunk near Manila - 8/13/2009 6:24:23 PM   
aztez

 

Posts: 4031
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline 		Luzon (december 15th and 16th)

A lot action in the Philippines. Happy to report that allied did hit back with an odd naval encounter indeed.

The turn begun with IJN TF entering the Bataan/Manila area. This got even more bold when I discovered that the TF contained several battleships.

At first these guys swiftly sunk several allied minesweeping vessels and I started to think that here we go again!

...than our guns started to blaze from Bataan.


Naval Gun Fire at Bataan - Coastal Guns Fire Back!

165 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Japanese Ships
BB Hyuga, Shell hits 7
BB Ise, Shell hits 2
BB Fuso, Shell hits 10
DD Wakatake
DD Yudachi, Shell hits 1, Mine hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
DD Murasame, Shell hits 1, Mine hits 2, on fire, heavy damage


Allied ground losses:
32 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 2 (0 destroyed, 2 disabled)


Manila Bay Defenses firing at BB Hyuga
Manila Bay Defenses firing at BB Ise
Manila Bay Defenses firing at BB Fuso
Manila Bay Defenses firing at DD Wakatake
Manila Bay Defenses firing at DD Yudachi
Manila Bay Defenses firing at DD Murasame


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 166 encounters mine field at Bataan (78,77)

Japanese Ships
BB Hyuga, Mine hits 1
BB Ise, Mine hits 1
DD Wakatake, Mine hits 1, heavy damage
DD Yudachi, Mine hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
DD Murasame, Mine hits 1, on fire, heavy damage


...and bonus was those nice mine hits! So, those are working at least here.

These BB's continued to bombard Clark Field for 2 days in a row so I doubt this was an mistake or overly agressive captain going crazy.

Either way this suits me fine.

I'am moving 2 PT squadrons and 4 DD's from Manila in order to intercept these. I doubt they can avoid surface combat encounter. Plus these guys need to move through Bataan once more! There are still mines left and those coastal guns are nasty piece of work.

I did contest the landings at Vigan too. The PT's did land few hits on enemy transports offshore. The nice bonus was that at least 2 IJN DD's also got hammered here.

Somewhat disappointed with the submarines though. I was really expecting more. No confirmed hits and few rounds of missed torpedoes. Not exactly what I was hoping for. I think this has to do with the heavy ASW presence there.

I'am now definately confident that it was wise strategy to with at Luzon. Our troops are building up forts in Clark Field and Manila. Hopefully these will take sometime to breakthrough.

I do not see any point defending Lingayen so orders given to withdraw out.

US aifrorce is still strong here. I think Dave needs to bring in more squadrons in order to contain this area of warfare. This ofcourse is exactly how I want it to go.

Allies will recieve 2 ground combat units in Luzon within next few days. Nice, I can split these between Manila and Clark Field.

There also still maybe 20 PT's and quite an few submarines ready for action.

As the headline says BB Ise is shown on sunken ships list. Now with the new FOW around this might not be true though.

Fingers crossed that we have more good news to report here very shortly.

There are developments in other theatres too. Unfortunately not enough time today to go through these but don't worry more on these later.

Now lets leave with an pic from Luzon....






Attachment (1)

(in reply to aztez)
Post #: 80
RE: BB Ise reported sunk near Manila - 8/13/2009 7:10:32 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline 		That was quite neat...and I think costly mistake! 

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to aztez)
Post #: 81
RE: BB Ise reported sunk near Manila - 8/13/2009 7:43:07 PM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline 		Very cool to see the Japanese BBs dueling it out with the defenses.

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC



For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 82
RE: BB Ise reported sunk near Manila - 8/13/2009 8:27:32 PM   
aztez

 

Posts: 4031
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline 		Sardaukar: Lets hope we nail or at least seriously damage the remaining BB's too. These must be damaged and I had 3 PT squadrons plus 4 DD's refitting in Manila.

The hex side is 40km and thus I don't see how these ships can go through Bataan without having to going through heavy duel.

Oh.. and I do not have any illusions that these "mistakes" will become regular events.

Erik: Yeah. At first I thought those big guns would not fire at all.

Also I think Dave tried to neutralize my fighter force gathered at Clark Field. Without those guns he might have succeed it since the airfield dagame levels are +20 after those bombardments.


China (15th and 16th)


Ok. I had time to do this post tonight.

Blue circle = Artillery / Morfars heading out to key bases. These were divided by importance of the base.
Red circle = Ichang & Sinyang and Nanchang.
Orange arrows = Chinese movements in general.
Green arrows = Japanese trying push out.

If you look at the map I think Dave might have made an mistake by moving +10 units into Ichang. He has there +1000av so the base itself is immune for immediate recapture.

However Ichang is kind of far forward from any other Japanese bases. If you look at the map the supply routes there are far and between. It is basically blockaded or as we Finns call it is nearly perfect "Motti". I don't know how much supplies there were initially but not much I gather and those troops need supplies.

If he chooses to withdraw his troops out of Ichang than I'am more than happy to take control of it. Since I have decent amount av power sieging the city.

By putting up pressure simultaneously Sinyang I'am trying to force him to make his moves. He has 5 units there at the moment and I would assume it amounts to 300-400av points. I should know this next turn since two units entered the base. This is also almost an "Motti" too.

The similar factor is that both cities can be made to starve. I have no idea what his initial plans where or if there are huge amount of infantry units moving in sooner than I think. At least we will get an reaction from Dave.

As said I have split several smaller Chinese units into 3 batallions/guerilla units. These will venture far into behind the enemy lines thus making supply runs/flow hard to keep up. The goal here is to at least hinder his offensives and if everything goes well destroy some divisions.

I rather make him react than be forced to react myself.

I have and still do expand a lot of fortifications in several bases. I have read it might not be good idea but than again key bases cannot have fortification levels of 0!!! So, the rule is if I'am soon short of supply than he will be too... and I rather be short of the supplies with decent amount fortifications to retreat to if necessary.

No airfields are expanded yet nor is there any resource repairs ON mode.

Lets see how this plays out...




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 83
RE: BB Ise reported sunk near Manila - 8/13/2009 10:36:46 PM   
Q-Ball


Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline 		aztez, great AAR so far! Sorry about losing those 2 CVs, but that should be a cautionary tale for Allied players; the mistake you made I think was picking a rendevous spot within a day's sail of KB. You can't afford a CV engagement in December under any circumstances; a better idea is to flee south to clear the area ASAP, and cut back east when you think they are gone. The Japanese player can hang around, retreat north toward the AOs, or retreat south toward where you were, so there is always a 1 in 3 chance of getting killed just like you did.

Besides Wake, I think a more tempting target if I was the Allies would be that big Replenishment TF, but going after that is a very risky move, since the Japanese player will probably be merging that with KB pretty quick.

_____________________________


(in reply to aztez)
Post #: 84
RE: BB Ise reported sunk near Manila - 8/13/2009 11:54:59 PM   
jimh009

 

Posts: 368
Joined: 5/15/2005
Status: offline 		Interesting that you are choosing a frontal defense in China. The Jap AI tore through all those Chinese units that start the game "out front." I thus ended retreating to the Nanning-Liuchow-Changsha-Ichang-Nanyang line.

(in reply to Q-Ball)
Post #: 85
RE: BB Ise reported sunk near Manila - 8/14/2009 3:39:56 AM   
jwilkerson


Posts: 10525
Joined: 9/15/2002
From: Kansas
Status: offline 		The Chinese can have a lot of fun "running around out front". It is quite possible to cutoff major chunks of the Japanese front. For instance, cutting off Hankow/Wuchang is very do-able and even sustainable for a while. But the Chinese player must be careful else he will ultimately lose more than he gains. For example note that little Chinese dot 2 hexes WSW of Chuhsien. A Japanese unit is already there and hence this city will probably fall the next turn, threatening to isolate the Chinese units to the East. So, even while the Chinese player is "running wild" he needs to protect his rear, especially for his larger units. The small "25 point Corps" can be considered to be throw away units" but the larger 100-200 point corps cannot be just thrown away due to VP cost. And the more active the Chinese are during this phase the better. If the Chinese are playing against a lazy, or otherwise occupied Japanese player, things could get embarrasing for the Japanese. On the other hand, if the Japanese player is playing "toe to toe" with the Chinese, then the Chinese player may need to get more cautious. At a high level this is not so different from stock. Chinese in AE seems to be a "revolving door" for both sides - but things can become unbalanced if one player or the other makes a mistake - same as stock. Just in AE there are more bases, more area, to cover. more room to mess up!!!




_____________________________

AE Project Lead
New Game Project Lead

(in reply to jimh009)
Post #: 86
RE: BB Ise reported sunk near Manila - 8/14/2009 5:21:33 AM   
devoncop


Posts: 1304
Joined: 7/17/2006
Status: offline 		Hi..

Nice ebb and flow going on now....You are putting up a good fight for the PI and I suspect it will force more Japanese to be committed to the operation than was initially intended which will save other areas as well as being more than a minor irritant. It was definately a high risk strategy trying to run the guns at Bataan but may have been a result of seeing the failure of Betties to damage Clark Field to any degree.

On the other side I also appreciated the stranglehold around Davau and Borneo put on by Tojo.That was an excellently co-ordinated move.

I would totally support the emphasis of jrlans on Noumea and the supply route to Oz, and its good to know you are confident on the state of things in the Sth Pacific.

Loving the AAR.

Now finish off those BB at Manila !!!

Best wishes
Ian

_____________________________

"I do not agree with what you say, but I shall defend to the death your right to say it"

(in reply to jwilkerson)
Post #: 87
RE: BB Ise reported sunk near Manila - 8/14/2009 6:53:22 AM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 9847
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/Israel
Status: offline 		I am anxiously waiting about fate of those those BBs in Manila/Bataan too! 

Hyuga, Ise and Fuso vs Fort Drum!





< Message edited by Sardaukar -- 8/14/2009 6:54:52 AM >

_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to devoncop)
Post #: 88
RE: BB Ise reported sunk near Manila - 8/14/2009 2:54:13 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		China: Have you determined if it is cost effective to slowly repair the light industry at Chungking?? You need more supply long term.

High Endurance AP/AK: If possible, I would change their refueling option to "Do Not Refuel" when they go between USA and Hawaii. Even to Pago Pago, if possible. The initial problem with the Allies is getting the fuel out of the USA with limited TKs and AOs. If they go to a forward base, you don't want them to drink up the fuel you are trying to stockpile.

Australia: How many fighters from the USA/Hawaii are in transit?? There are none here and with those in Luzon restricted to die in place, they are needed there asap.

BBB (Big Bad Boise): She needs to go to Soerabaja to reload those 6" shells. Found out that Balikpapan is not big enough the hard way.

B-17s: I would consider putting them on night time AF missions to keep your opponent on his toes.

Just my $.02 from limited time with AE.


(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 89
RE: BB Ise reported sunk near Manila - 8/14/2009 6:11:13 PM   
aztez

 

Posts: 4031
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline 		Q-Ball: Thanks. Good and bad things happen. Yeah, I wasn't aiming for an duel with KB. Just rolled the dice and thought KB would sail toward home islands. As said I don't know whether those +30 dauntless dive bombers hit anything since FOW kind of vanished the mission. At the moment I have no idea where KB is... best guess would be Truk.

Wake has fallen. As expected Dave just storm the place once I got no CV cover left.

jimh009: Yes and no. I'am not going fight it out men to men in "frontal" areas. Allthough I'am not going abandon it alltogether. It will be kind of skirmish. When thing heat up too much time to get out and fast. That is the plan anyway.

Ichang is "gone" as you can see it. Instead maybe we starve him out of there since his frontline isn't exactly flat.


jwilkerson: Definately. I will take an hard look at China when the next turn comes. To me at least the whole theatre is way diffrent and actually gives a lot possibilities to both sides.

The map alone does it. More room here means so many variable strategies to play out. I bet this theatre will be diffrent in pretty much every PBEM we will see in the future.

I will pay attention and try not get cut off, This goes both ways, I have actually splitted up those bigger corps units too (at least many of them). Never done that before and it might be briliant move or end up in total disaster.

The problem here I see is the lack of fighters and I'am having trouble getting those out of the north due to their short range.

Dave definately is not lazy. He is actually bombing the hell out of few bases already and not much I can do about it.

Hmmm, pretty much everybody is warning me againts supply shortage but I'am still committed to building forts. Chinese really need them to my opinion at least.

What I have read about ground combat.. leaders + artillery units can play big diffrence. So, I did try to think through how divide those meger units I have at my disposal.


devoncop: That is exactly what I'am hoping for too but with this new FOW you really cannot be sure what the damage actually is.. (you will notice when I post an report from Luzon and Kuantan soon) I don't have the actual turn but ran the combat replay though.

Pretty much speechless what happened at Davao. That was an textbook execution of that plan with minimal forces committed. I doubt my surface fleet could have done anything useful there.

I have units and aircraft underway towards southern pacific. Allthough, I have made couple of big blunders and will post about them later on too. I will fight it out at Noumea, Pago Pago, Christmas Island and Fiji's. Also moving supplies and fuel into Tahiti.


Sardaukar: Sorry to report but there was no 2nd round of Fort Drum duel! I guess those US soldiers got drunk and missed the Japanse TF.. not to worry it wasn't all bad. More about that in a bit.


ny59giants: Welcome and nice to see you here too. Actually those reparis are OFF at the moment. I need those supplies to build up initial forts. To be honest I haven't made up my mind one way or the other. I'am glad we have the houserule for no resource bombings here for either side.

Intresting. This is one are I'am struggling to get my mindset correct. This has really changed hasn't it. Pretty much all my transports are on DO NOT refuel orders but this basically means they are lightly escorted. Need get this sorted though for sure. Other area that is really hammering my brain is the withdrawals of units. Quite confusing at the beginning but once I get the hang off it I think this is nice feature with some strategic possibilities.

As for Australia. Actually the amount of fighters moving there is flat 0! I need to secure those key islands first and once that is done move aircraft into Oz. I doubt Japan is able to launch anykind of offensive there for longtime... and hopefully I'am correct.

BBB is live and well. It sailed into Soerebaja and is an flagship for 1 surface combat TF.

Night missions? Hmmm, I haven't even remotely consider this option. I might give it a whirl to see what it does.


I do appreciate all the feedback and comments you guys made. I will post an summary based on combat.txt since I do not have the turn as stated earlier,

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: US Carriers clash with KB... Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   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

1.922