RE: Breaking News - No Sub Attacks!

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: Breaking News - No Sub Attacks!

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: Breaking News - No Sub Attacks!

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Breaking News - No Sub Attacks! - 10/20/2009 7:09:13 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rob Brennan UK

Nice AAR .. just caught up on a good read, Thank you for taking the time to post one.

RE :-
quote:

The KB remains posted near Flores Island, conducting airfield suppression raids against bases that I'm not even using. What is Miller thinking?

Maybe he's trying to finish off the last of the 'hobbits' Homo floriensis <sp>

Hey, where is Captain Mandrake anyways? Haven't heard from him in a while...

_____________________________

(in reply to Rob Brennan UK)

Post #: 181

RE: Breaking News - No Sub Attacks! - 10/20/2009 7:27:47 PM

Cuttlefish

Posts: 2454
Joined: 1/24/2007
From: Oregon, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Hey, where is Captain Mandrake anyways? Haven't heard from him in a while...

He's around. Mostly he's busy cleaning my clock in the "From Here...Well, it Feels Like Eternity" game.

I am enjoying this AAR, Canoerebel. Good luck!

_____________________________

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 182

Here come the Rebels (maybe)! - 10/22/2009 4:17:21 AM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

After two days off, I returned to the game and decided to pull the trigger. The Allied carriers will advance to within four hexes of Soerabaja (if I correctly interpreted speed) on April 18 in search of targets. I don't know what I'll find:

1. During the preceding two-day turn it appeared that the KB moved close to Soerabaja on the 16th. Despite plentiful LBA patrol aircraft at Malang I lost sight of the KB on the 16th and there was no sight of the Jap carriers when I got the turn file for the 17th. I *think* the KB is at Soerabaja. If not there I believe Miller has already moved them toward some distant point to support his next operations.

2. If the KB *is* there I hope: (a) that CAP will be halfed since it's in a base hex, and (2) that there won't be any LBA in the hex (the force that took Soerabaja a few days ago didn't include a base force). If I'm wrong about LBA I'm in big trouble.

3. If the KB left the area or leaves at the start of this turn there are abundant other ships at Soerabaja - lots of transports.

4. I have the carriers set to retire, so the attacks should only occur on on day, giving my ships a one-day head start on the return trip.

Plenty of risks involved in this strike, but it's a hunch I've felt strongly enough to play.

I've been pondering why Miller kept the KB in the DEI. I *think* now that he was worried that the Allies would load up the Java airfields with carrier strike aircraft. (Good idea, but by the time I thought of it Soerabaja was about to fall).

(in reply to Cuttlefish)

Post #: 183

RE: Here come the Rebels (maybe)! - 10/22/2009 4:25:46 AM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

Il nous faut de l'audace, encore de l'audace, toujours de l'audace!

Go get 'em Canorebel! I've been hoping you'd opt for this masterstroke!

_____________________________

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 184

RE: Here come the Rebels (maybe)! - 10/22/2009 10:31:50 AM

Wittmann30

Posts: 43
Joined: 3/5/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline

Well, i would have bet that you do that ;) Good luck!

Just a question, what if your opponent disbanded KB in Soerabaja? Did you ordered a port strike as secondary mission?

Hopefully you catch him docked. Can't wait to see the results

< Message edited by Wittmann30 -- 10/22/2009 10:35:47 AM >

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 185

RE: Here come the Rebels (maybe)! - 10/22/2009 2:58:45 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

4/16/42 and 4/17/42

Operation Antietam: As noted in my previous post this operation is a "go". All carrier strike aircraft have been set for Naval Attack (primary) and Port Strike - Soerabaja (secondary). The TFs are currently 12 hexes south of Soerabaja. The "plan" is to move north eight hexes (to a point four hexes south of Soerabaja and five hexes southeast of Semereng) on the 18th and launch the attack. All TFs are following TF 448, which is set to retire, so after those day-one strikes the TFs are "supposed" to pull back toward Perth. This is a complicated attack with several unfamiliar sequences that must go right or the attack could fizzle...or, of course, the KB and LBA could be waiting and I could get a very bad dose of "I wish I hadn't done this." Optimally, the attack damages the KB or other Japs shipping, administering more harm than it receives. We'll see.

SoPac: The big, long, risky operation to reinforce Noumea, Suva and Pago Pago is drawing to a close - one more regiment of Marines will arrive at PP in two days bringing the AV there to about 700. If Operation Antietam goes awry, Miller will have "free reign" to raid and pillage in the Pacific for a number of months, so these bases have to be strong enough to stop an invasion or require such a massive commitment of Jap assets that it serves as an effective speed bump. The reinforcing operation has gone so well that I even have a small garrison (Aussie brigade) at Efate with another brigade on the way to Koumac.

India/Ceylon: This theater "feels" much more secure to me than it did in WitP. One reason for that is that in WitP I fought a very forward defense - most everything went into Burma where I successfully held the Mandalay line. In AE it doesn't seem to make sense to put too much forward due to the supply situation, so bases in India have larger garrisons. At the moment I have 550 AV at Colombo and 900 at Madras. Bombay and Karachi have about 300 AV each. Diamond Harbor, Calcutta, and Chittagong have decent garrisons in the 300 AV range. I will eventually move units forward from Madras, but right now I like having them at 100 prep so that they can train up from the 30s and 40s range. There is no indication that Miller has designs on India.

Oz: This continent likewise seems safer, in part because Miller is fairly cautious unlike John III, my other regular opponent who likes to run bezerk. Perth has 300 AV, Darwin about 250 with two good regiments on the way (they each landed at Perth, caught the train to Alice Springs, and now have to march overland to Darwin). Brisbane and Sydney are quite strong. Melbourne and Adelaide are decent given the advantage of their remote locations. Even Townsville and Cairns have enough to halt "quicky" attacks. The east side of Oz feels safe to me. Darwin is vulnerable due to location. Perth is critical due to it's supply link to Capetown.

Subs: The carnage continues. RO-60 gets a TK near Melbourne (I thought TKs were notoriously tought to sink, but in this game to date one TT has been enough to finish them); I-23 got an AK at PP and then put a TT into a brittle DD that is safely in port and may survive. PP is mined, now, but to no obvious effect thus far.

Onward, Antietam!

(in reply to Wittmann30)

Post #: 186

RE: Here come the Rebels (maybe)! - 10/22/2009 4:09:41 PM

ny59giants

Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline

South Pacific: How are you defending in depth around Suva and Pago Pago?? With so many more potential bases near by, I'm still wondering how this area can be defended. I would think the bases near PP that have potential port expansion (non-zero) would be possible targets.

Line Islands: Did you decide to build up Palmyra and/or Christmas?? If so, what additional troops did you send there??

Good Luck on your hit and run.

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 187

Antietam = Carnage - 10/22/2009 4:39:48 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

Gents,

My opponent just sent me the combat replay file with a request that I play the combat turn and then get in touch with him via email. I played the turn and it is absolute carnage on both sides. I have to go from memory, because I don't have the text file yet, but it appears that the strike was a mutual distruction event although strategically it may be a pretty important Allied victory. I *think* my opponent may have interpreted it that way and may be mulling over some sort of massive "oops, let's do this over" (not sure, but that's my hunch).

For some reason the Japs struck first with two big strikes - one from carriers docked at Soerabaja and another from carriers docked at Semereng (a surprise because the Allies had TONS of patrol aircraft at Malang and on ship). The Allies had a HUGE strike against the Soerabaja ships in the a.m. and a large strike against the Semereng ships in the p.m.

The main KB was at Soerabaja and I think Hiryu, Soryu, and at least one other CV took alot of hits along with several CVLs. Some damage (including TTs) inflicted on a few BBs with bomb strikes on smaller stuff. The P.M. strike appeared to badly damage three fleet carriers at Semereng.

The Jap strikes probably did in four or five Allied carriers and at least three or four BBs.

Carnage! I'll post the actual combat reports when available along with any comments/requests from my opponent.

Strategically, I'd say this has to be a victory. The KB has been reduced considerably for months which means the Pacific should be safer from overwhelming attacks. The Allies took heavy losses tactically, but I'd say the losses were roughly comparable.

< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 10/22/2009 5:03:05 PM >

(in reply to ny59giants)

Post #: 188

RE: Antietam = Carnage - 10/22/2009 4:41:32 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

Here's the email from Miller:

"Hi Dan, I have tried to run it again two more times since I sent it to you and no luck....it crashes near the end so I have not got no way of getting my next turn back to you. I think you are going to have to send it again.

Needless to say it seemed like a total disaster for me......I am going to have to think long and hard as to whether it is worthwhile for me to continue......excellent move by you so I can't complain. Please sent the same turn again and I will see if it will run all the way..."

There replay does crash at the very end, so that could be a problem. As for the possibility of conceding, I'll mull over how I would respond to that.

< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 10/22/2009 4:42:04 PM >

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 189

RE: Antietam = Carnage - 10/22/2009 5:18:27 PM

Smeulders

Posts: 1879
Joined: 8/9/2009
Status: offline

Congratulations are in order, this could very well be a huge victory.

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 190

RE: Antietam = Carnage - 10/22/2009 5:40:27 PM

Wittmann30

Posts: 43
Joined: 3/5/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline

Haha! Did this crash problem happened you before in the game?

(in reply to Smeulders)

Post #: 191

RE: Antietam = Carnage - 10/22/2009 5:45:53 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

No, it didn't happen before! It's purely bad luck - I've run it myself and it crashes on me too. My opponent is a "good guy" who I've played for years. No question about the legitimacy of the crash - but talk about bad timing!

I've re-done the turn - it didn't take long because, as you all know, my TFs had been steaming in circles for a week waiting for me to make the decision to strike or withdraw. So all I had to do was issue orders for the lead TF to advance to the target hex. I also had to re-issue orders to a few of the air groups that had anomolies (one group of Devastators had been set to train until the turn I had ordered the original strike, etc.).

I've sent him the re-done turn, so we have to do it all over again. No doubt the results will differ, but hopefully the overall balance will be roughly the same.

Stay tune for further reports later this afternoon.

P.S. Antietam appears to have been an excellent name for this operation.

P.P.S. Sometimes it's right to go with a "strong hunch" (especially if the hunch comes is a product of experience with the game and familiarity with the opponent).

(in reply to Wittmann30)

Post #: 192

RE: Here come the Rebels (maybe)! - 10/22/2009 5:51:19 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants
South Pacific: How are you defending in depth around Suva and Pago Pago?? With so many more potential bases near by, I'm still wondering how this area can be defended. I would think the bases near PP that have potential port expansion (non-zero) would be possible targets.

Line Islands: Did you decide to build up Palmyra and/or Christmas?? If so, what additional troops did you send there??

Good Luck on your hit and run.

While awaiting the re-do Antietam results, I'll reply to NY's questions.

The Allies have to garrision something, so it seems like the largest bases (no garrison limits) with the best airfields and ports are the logical ones. You're right about the multitude of other hexes that have good base potential, but it would take the Japs awhile to get them up and running; and wouldn't it be awfully hard for the Japs to ignore Noumea, Suva, and Pago Pago while trying to build up something nearby to compete with them? Finally, each of these bases is now staffed by large base forces with quite an array of aircraft. So tactically and strategically this MLR is stout.

Yes, I've reinforced and built up the Line Islands. Christmas Island has an AV of 82 with good forts and base forces. It doesn't have a garrison limit, so it can use more. Palmyra has an AV of 50 and is already at its limit of 6,000 troops. Johnston Island I haven't reinforced; Canton I've reinforced slightly but it's so far forward that Miller could take it relatively easily. I chose to reinforce the other bases listed rather than Canton. Given enough time, of course, I would have new troops to commit there.

_____________________________

"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper�s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.

(in reply to ny59giants)

Post #: 193

RE: Antietam = Carnage - 10/22/2009 6:00:45 PM

Swenslim

Posts: 437
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: Odessa, Ukraine
Status: offline

Interesting, did you sank his CV's or just heavily damaged ? Because if you just damaged them (even for half year in repair yards) and lost 4-5 allied CV's I cant name this victory at all.

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 194

RE: Antietam = Carnage - 10/22/2009 6:10:03 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

I dunno yet - several Jap carriers only took bomb hits - two or three or four 1,000 pounders. They are in port, which could save them, but Jap carriers are also very brittle. My best guess is that at least two carriers went under with three or four more heavily damaged. Two CVLs were roughed up and they are even more heavily damaged. I'd say one or two Jap BBs took torpedoes, which should shut them down for many months. IE - the KB is out of operation for three to six months. This is critical because Miller was just wrapping up his DEI operations and would next be looking to CenPac or SoPac. It's hard to get frisky in the wide open expanses of the Pacific without strong carrier support.

So, the intial results I believe were a strong Allied victory even though Allied losses likely exceeded those of the Japs. Miller feels that way too, obviously, given his email comments.

We'll see what the second replay does and I'll post the results.

If Miller concludes that this was a strategic defeat of such magnitude that the game cannot continue, I'll probably offer to go back perhaps a turn or two, cancel the operation, and he agrees to keep the KB posted in the DEI vicinity for a period long enough to permit me to get my carriers out of the area - perhaps a week or ten days.

(in reply to Swenslim)

Post #: 195

RE: Antietam = Carnage - 10/22/2009 6:19:37 PM

modrow

Posts: 1100
Joined: 8/27/2006
Status: offline

Canoerebel,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
No, it didn't happen before! It's purely bad luck - I've run it myself and it crashes on me too. My opponent is a "good guy" who I've played for years. No question about the legitimacy of the crash - but talk about bad timing!

did you shorten any replay ? In my game against Rattovolante, I once got a .001 file which seemed to crash all the time in the middle of the combat replays, always at the same attack. I was able to make it run through by watching really everything, never shortcutting anything that was shown. Perhaps this helps in your case as well...

Hartwig

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 196

RE: Antietam = Carnage - 10/22/2009 6:29:52 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

I'm always shortcutting the interminable Jap bombardment at Changsha plus the nuisance little air raids. I"ll try again. Thanks for the suggestion.

(in reply to modrow)

Post #: 197

RE: Antietam = Carnage - 10/22/2009 6:37:03 PM

Q-Ball

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

Dan, very interesting gambit there. Cuttlefish, you must be wondering if I have several carriers out there.....

It's pretty easy to sneak up on Java if you are the Allies. A reasonable precaution for the Japanese is an Air HQ and Nettys at Samerang. It's also a mistake to Dock a CV anywhere except where you are guaranteed safety, or put it in a position to reduce CAP because it's on a coastline. Some lessons are learned the hard way.

It's probably hard to say who won until you can look at your damage and the combat report. One advantage he has is that he can dock damaged ships right away, and you can't. Nevertheless, his reaction would indicate that he's disappointed. I can't wait for the replay!

_____________________________

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 198

RE: Antietam = Carnage - 10/22/2009 6:38:37 PM

aztez

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

Intresting to see these combat reports from that encounter.

Intresting that your opponent thinks this viable to admit defeat in such an early date. He did risk his carriers and this encounter seems not be one sided affair either. To me nothing wrong here since both sides took damage.

Sometimes risks can pay off nicely and vice versa.

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 199

RE: Antietam = Carnage - 10/22/2009 6:47:01 PM

rattovolante

Posts: 188
Joined: 8/30/2009
From: Italy
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: hartwig.modrow

did you shorten any replay ? In my game against Rattovolante, I once got a .001 file which seemed to crash all the time in the middle of the combat replays, always at the same attack. I was able to make it run through by watching really everything, never shortcutting anything that was shown. Perhaps this helps in your case as well...

Hartwig

Really? what round was it? I didn't have this problem, I wonder if it was a problem of the .001 file (i.e., if I re-generate it, will it still cause the crash?)

(in reply to modrow)

Post #: 200

RE: Antietam = Carnage - 10/22/2009 7:08:58 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

I replayed the turn, got interrupted midway through and missed the second strike on the Allied carriers, but took note of the damage to the Japanese fleet, which seemed greater. Here's the full damage to the Japanese fleet (subject to FOW of course) and partial damage to the American fleet (missing results from a medium strike):

Japs:
1. Carriers: Zuiho (4 B), Soryu (2 B), Hiryu (3 B), Ryujo (1 B), Akagi (3B 1 TT), Kaga (3 B), Zuikaku (1 B), Shokaku (2 B), Shoho (3 B). I'd say Zuiho, Akagi, and Shoho are likely to go under the rest likely to survive.
2. Battleships: Ise (10 B, 2TT), Nagato (2B, 4TT), Hyuga (1B), Mutsu (1 B), Fuso (1B), Yamashiro (2B). Ise is probably toast and Nagato is 50/50.
3. One CA, one CL and three DDs damaged.

Allies:

1. Carriers: Hornet (2 TT), Lexington (2TT and 1B).
2. Battleships: Royal Sovereign (3 TT), New Mexico (5 TT), Mississippi (4 TT).
3. One CL damaged.

I know other Allied carriers were hurt by the missing strike - I still think about five Allied carriers were in rough shape.

Overall, though, you can see that the KB would be "in the shop" for months and some hard to replace ships probably went under.

(in reply to rattovolante)

Post #: 201

RE: Antietam = Carnage - 10/22/2009 7:15:38 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

Miller's take on the battle:

"I would hate to back up becasue I would be denying you a great victory. I am guessing but I think you would have sunk a CV, a CVL and a BB whilst losing Hornet and a BB. However, several other of my Cvs would be badly damaged and out of the game for at least six months..........a huge strategic victory for you."

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 202

RE: Antietam = Carnage - 10/22/2009 7:17:30 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

P.S. Antietam appears to have been an excellent name for this operation.

Yes, you're right. Mass carnage on both sides? Check. Strategic withdrawal for one side from the region? Check.

Can you comment on the size of the IJN strike against you? Was it successful due to overwhelming numbers or did it look like his attacks were halved due to the effect of the port hex?

I'll withhold comment re: my opinion of his quitting the game after this setback.

_____________________________

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 203

RE: Antietam = Carnage - 10/22/2009 7:22:10 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

It's hard to tell whether the strikes were halved because he had the KB divided between Soerabaja (Hiryu, Soryu, Kaga, Akagi, Ryujo, Zuiho) and Semereng (Shokaku, Zuikaku, Shoho). These were the morning strikes:

Soerabaja: 82 Zero, 58 Kate, 44 Val (hmm, that's not all that large, so I'd say it was halved).
Semereng: 45 Z, 25 K, 24 V (same here).

So I'd say the strikes were halved making it clear that it's a dangerous thing to have carriers parked in ports. The Allies would've been destroyed by full strikes.

A second question, though: Why did the Japs get the jump here? Plenty of Jakes made sightings of the Allied carriers, but Allied Seagulls and Walrusses got plenty of sightings as did all the land-based bombers and patrol aircraft (most of these were set to 100% search). Seems like the Allies should've gotten in the first lick - they knew the precise location of the port and had plenty of patrol sightings. Why did the Japs get first strike both a.m. and p.m.?

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 204

RE: Antietam = Carnage - 10/22/2009 7:39:41 PM

Swenslim

Posts: 437
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: Odessa, Ukraine
Status: offline

Hm, I still think that this is draw. Compare to historic Midway Japan results are much better (if he lost only 1 CV and 1 CVL). Of cource if more japan CV's are lost this will be major defeat.

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 205

RE: Antietam = Carnage - 10/22/2009 7:47:08 PM

Q-Ball

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
Why did the Japs get first strike both a.m. and p.m.?

I don't think it matters who goes first, does it? I always thought that each side got at least one shot....it's assumed the strikes take off and pass each other, right?

Or does it?

_____________________________

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 206

RE: Antietam = Carnage - 10/22/2009 8:13:02 PM

Canoerebel

Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline

Sven, the Allies can recover from big carrier battle losses early in the war, the Japs can't. The Japs have the initiative early and have to make big gains - gains that become much more difficult in the vast expanse of the Pacific. The Japs simply have to have an intact KB. So, even if the battle was a tactical draw (or even a marginal Jap tactical victory) it can be a crippling strategic blow.

Q-Ball, I'm not sure. It seems like I've seen some battles in the past where one side had much better recon information and was able to get in strikes before the other side could launch, but perhaps that memory comes from UV or even earlier (anybody remember Fighting Flattops, a web-only game that was free but then went to a charge to play?).

Note: I should note that my opponent's despair should not be taken as an indication he was ready to throw in the towel. Nearly every game I've played I've taken a lopsided losses, despaired, murmured whether I could really continue, and after a few hours or days was ready to proceed. In my game vs. John III I had that happen two or three times and ended up winning (due to Allied superiority mostly). I'll guarantee that Miller would do the same - and he's already doing his best to get the crash resolved so that we can proceed. There's no quit to Miller. I, on the other hand, realize the loss of the KB can be a death blow to the Japs, really destroying game balance. I'd almost rather re-do than have the game thrown so out-of-whack.

But, as noted previously, I think the battle may have been much more costly to the Allies than Miller realizes. We'll see!

Some lessons I take from this battle:

1. Carriers in port are much more vulnerable.
2. Fog of war is much better in AE - in WitP I think Miller might've gotten wind of the Allied fleet approaching Java - through my seaplanes sighting this or that and him getting copies of those reports, etc. Here, my seaplanes generated alot of traffic ("wake sighted," "shadow sighted," etc.), but Miller apparently didn't see any of that.
3. Hermes' Swordfish were a help. I often poo-poo Hermes, but she's done good work twice in this game.
4. Massing Allied carriers (RN and US) early in the game is effective, but they still can't stand up to the consolidated KB (unless the KB is depleted or in port). Had I tangled with the KB straight up in the open ocean I would've lost badly. So don't get too frisky even with 5 US CVs and 2 RN CVs (or, when Wasp arrives in mid-42, 6 US CVs). I'll be sure to keep that in mind. I got lucky this time.
5. I had all my carriers in one-CV TFs, which once again proved effective at limiting the number of carriers targeted.
6. Three or four Allied carrier TFs included BBs - in those cases both BBs and accompanying carrier seemed to get whacked pretty hard. Not sure it made a great deal of difference to have the BBs along. I mean, if you're going to take six strikes from torpedoes in one TF, would you prefer to have three vs. a carrier and three vs. a BB or all six vs. a carrier? I haven't drawn any final conclusions, but this is something to mull over.
7. The mutual damage inflicted seems very realistic - yet another nod to the AE developers. Sometimes in Uncommon Valor you'd get ridiculously one-sided carrier battles. This one smacked of realism.
8. It's easier playing the Allies.
9. I used to think playing the Allies early in the war was a chore and a burden; not so, both judging from my AE and WitP games and from some of the other AARs I'm reading right now. Experienced Allied players have alot of challenges in arranging their defenses and have some opportunities to really mess with the Japs.

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 207

RE: Antietam = Carnage - 10/22/2009 8:23:49 PM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

6. Three or four Allied carrier TFs included BBs - in those cases both BBs and accompanying carrier seemed to get whacked pretty hard. Not sure it made a great deal of difference to have the BBs along. I mean, if you're going to take six strikes from torpedoes in one TF, would you prefer to have three vs. a carrier and three vs. a BB or all six vs. a carrier? I haven't drawn any final conclusions, but this is something to mull over.

Tough call. Sometimes allied CV's can survive 2 or 3 torps, but all 6? I would have the BB's along. Of course the old ones slow you down, so still a tough call.

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 208

RE: Antietam = Carnage - 10/22/2009 8:41:56 PM

ny59giants

Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline

I would say the BBs helped soak up 12 TTs that would have put more of the Allies CVs under the waves. I lean towards having the Allied BBs along with the CVs whenever possible just for this reason. Now with AE, you can have a BB heavy SC TF be followed by 2 or 3 hexes by your CVs and hope they take in most of the attack.

A Japanese player will now need to keep a few Glen equipped subs with KB as forward scouts. The modern day US Navy always has at a sub or two with her CVNs to listen and prevent attacks as SOP.

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 209

RE: Antietam = Carnage - 10/22/2009 9:32:33 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

Canorebel,

As mentioned previously, had you been playing one day turns, I think there's a possibility that Miller would have come off even worse off. If you had timed your strike (or the game had allowed) your strike while he was refilling (instead of the 'next play interval'-2 days), he would also have lost his carrier op points while refueling. Diminished CAP and limited strike would have likely resulted beyond the effect of the port hex effect.

How many of the IJN planes were damaged or destroyed by flak before they got at your CVs? The BB tremendous flak capability could have destroyed or diminished the effect of these a/c before they got at your CVs, thus making damage to your carriers less. That, in addition to the 'torp magnet', make BBs a must in my CV group formations.

Did your air groups from your damaged CVs divert somewhere? His most certainly did and will probably form quite a formidable defense on Java now. If there's a consolation to him, this would be it. In a deep-ocean encounter, these pilots and their aircraft would have been lost if unable to divert to intact carriers. He can use these as a nucleus for replacement CV pilots as the game moves forward. It is probably worth rounding up your stray aircraft in an effort to salvage these airgroups, wherever they may be.

Hermes' aircraft (and maybe others) are likely out of torpedoes now, making those stringbags considerably less effective. Run Forrest, run!

Looking forward to your replay bug being settled so you may proceed. Glad to hear that the 'throwing in the towel' grumbles are just that.

_____________________________

(in reply to ny59giants)

Post #: 210

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Breaking News - No Sub Attacks!