RE: Dancing with the Stars

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: Dancing with the Stars

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: Dancing with the Stars

Page: << < prev 93 94 [95] 96 97 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Dancing with the Stars - 12/8/2010 8:08:43 PM

Cap Mandrake

Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Scott_USN

Here is my opinion Suva should be the retreat no more base.

I think you guys need to be as bold as you were in defense of DEI region. Especially your naval engagements.

As you know your next carriers are at least 9 to 10 months out. However without using what you have now they are just pretty suntanning decks.

This my opinion only. I would attack I would sprint my SF to engage the landing force, my CV tf I would attemp a strike on the LYB carriers only a couple of bombs will ruin their operation. They are tired now and under strength. I would do this knowing I would most likely get hurt but there is that chance to break them. Offense is a ways away I could wait for the fast CV

That is what I would do.

Yes that is essentially PLAN TANGO or PLAN SALSA except I would put the CAP over the carriers and let the cruisers eat some bombs if they have too when the sun comes up. I could probably scare up a few P-40E's from Samoa for a token CAP over the cruisers.

(in reply to Scott_USN)

Post #: 2821

RE: Dancing with the Stars - 12/8/2010 8:10:50 PM

Scott_USN

Posts: 715
Joined: 6/2/2004
From: Eagle River, Alaska USA
Status: offline

Plan salsa will hurt I am sure but the rewards are the highest in my opinion. I think I would keep the uk in the cv group they can take lots of damage

Plan A with 3 cv :)

(in reply to Scott_USN)

Post #: 2822

RE: Dancing with the stars - 12/8/2010 8:13:18 PM

Sauvequipeut

Posts: 79
Joined: 4/7/2007
Status: offline

Plan Tango.

'The more you use, the less you lose', as Uncle Bill Slim was fond of saying.

ps...anyone have any idea what the amphib unload rate for motorised support landing from xAK's is?

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)

Post #: 2823

RE: Dancing with the stars - 12/8/2010 8:15:00 PM

Chickenboy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: sprior

The big fly in the SAG ointment is/are the Bettys (Betties?) flying Naval Attack. How do we provide CAP over them? Contrariwise I say bring on the salsa. And can I have tortilla chips too please?

The Betty (torp) range is 17. They'll be unescorted >14. What is the range to Suva from Noumea? You shouldn't have to retreat too much to the East to be out of their range, IIRC.

Have the carriers LRCAP the SAG from the East. SAG ingresses during the night and shoots the **** out of JJ. Egress at first light under LRCAP from carriers. Once away from that Betty ointment fly, run like hell.

Have your carriers stand off a calculated movement distance East of Suva to allow LRCAP coverage after full SAG move. Neither they nor the CAs will be in grave danger of a retaliatory strike. Or...if there is a retaliatory strike on the SAG, hopefully the LRCAP will defang it sufficiently to allow the SAG survival.

It's worth a shot.

< Message edited by Chickenboy -- 12/8/2010 8:17:19 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to sprior)

Post #: 2824

RE: Dancing with the Stars - 12/8/2010 8:17:24 PM

Scott_USN

Posts: 715
Joined: 6/2/2004
From: Eagle River, Alaska USA
Status: offline

They might make it in and out the otherside before betty. What is the betty torp range 14?

< Message edited by Scott_USN -- 12/8/2010 9:00:18 PM >

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)

Post #: 2825

RE: Dancing with the stars - 12/8/2010 8:18:21 PM

sprior

Posts: 8596
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Portsmouth, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ps...anyone have any idea what the amphib unload rate for motorised support landing from xAK's is?

Very slow.

_____________________________

"Grown ups are what's left when skool is finished."
"History started badly and hav been geting steadily worse."
- Nigel Molesworth.

(in reply to Sauvequipeut)

Post #: 2826

RE: Dancing with the Stars - 12/8/2010 8:19:17 PM

Scott_USN

Posts: 715
Joined: 6/2/2004
From: Eagle River, Alaska USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

quote:

ORIGINAL: Scott_USN

Here is my opinion Suva should be the retreat no more base.

I think you guys need to be as bold as you were in defense of DEI region. Especially your naval engagements.

As you know your next carriers are at least 9 to 10 months out. However without using what you have now they are just pretty suntanning decks.

This my opinion only. I would attack I would sprint my SF to engage the landing force, my CV tf I would attemp a strike on the LYB carriers only a couple of bombs will ruin their operation. They are tired now and under strength. I would do this knowing I would most likely get hurt but there is that chance to break them. Offense is a ways away I could wait for the fast CV

That is what I would do.

Yes that is essentially PLAN TANGO or PLAN SALSA except I would put the CAP over the carriers and let the cruisers eat some bombs if they have too when the sun comes up. I could probably scare up a few P-40E's from Samoa for a token CAP over the cruisers.

Those token fighters can disrupt attacks sometimes I would keep them over the carriers. SF has a way of sneaking past

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)

Post #: 2827

RE: Dancing with the Stars - 12/8/2010 8:19:39 PM

Scott_USN

Posts: 715
Joined: 6/2/2004
From: Eagle River, Alaska USA
Status: offline

Doh

< Message edited by Scott_USN -- 12/8/2010 8:57:22 PM >

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)

Post #: 2828

RE: Dancing with the stars - 12/8/2010 8:21:51 PM

Scott_USN

Posts: 715
Joined: 6/2/2004
From: Eagle River, Alaska USA
Status: offline

Double post

< Message edited by Scott_USN -- 12/8/2010 8:53:41 PM >

(in reply to Sauvequipeut)

Post #: 2829

RE: Dancing with the stars - 12/8/2010 8:25:06 PM

Sauvequipeut

Posts: 79
Joined: 4/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sprior

quote:

ps...anyone have any idea what the amphib unload rate for motorised support landing from xAK's is?

Very slow.

Interesting. I wonder how much use the 'Guards Tank Division' is without its organic meals-on-wheels service?

(in reply to sprior)

Post #: 2830

RE: Dancing with the stars - 12/8/2010 8:28:53 PM

sprior

Posts: 8596
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Portsmouth, UK
Status: offline

It will take a long time to recover from its disruption, which I'm guessing is quite considerable.

_____________________________

"Grown ups are what's left when skool is finished."
"History started badly and hav been geting steadily worse."
- Nigel Molesworth.

(in reply to Sauvequipeut)

Post #: 2831

RE: Dancing with the stars - 12/8/2010 8:29:23 PM

Chickenboy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sauvequipeut

quote:

ORIGINAL: sprior

quote:

ps...anyone have any idea what the amphib unload rate for motorised support landing from xAK's is?

Very slow.

Interesting. I wonder how much use the 'Guards Tank Division' is without its organic meals-on-wheels service?

What makes you think that their meals are organic? I bet you much of their seaweed is cultured rather than wild caught. You think those fish heads they're eating are organically produced, dude? Just too much paperwork overhead to go organic or vegan for combatant meal services of the time.

_____________________________

(in reply to Sauvequipeut)

Post #: 2832

RE: Dancing with the Stars - 12/8/2010 8:44:26 PM

Alfred

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

TIMHO, the key elements at work here are:

1. The date is June, hence the landing is outside of the Japanese amphibious landing bonus
2. The TF listed on post #2809 is has no APs or xAPs. If the invading troops are being transported solely on AKs, then their unload rate is going to be quite slow.
3. The fact that the LYB have brought their own support troops to Nadi strongly suggests that there will be no landing at Suva, instead an overland march from Nadi supported by enemy air based at Nadi is the enemy plan.
4. IIRC, Noumea and Luganville are both well outside of Zero range. Hence only KB fighters will be available to both escort bombers and provide CAP.
5. It is not neccesary to damage the enemy carriers off Fiji, destroy the LYB land force and sea lift capacity and the LYBs will have their offensive capabilities in the Pacific crippled.

Accordingly I would

(a) immediately march from Suva to Nadi every available infantryman and tanker - they should get there before the enemy fully disembarks/unloads supply. Only leave at Suva aviation support and engineers to service aircraft and fill in holes in the Suva runways
(b) throw everything against the enemy troop ships at Nadi (that includes PT only TFs) and disregard the enemy carriers. Send in multiple SAGs to hit the landing, have your CVs operating their fighters at 100% combined CAP (for CV cover) and LRCAP (for SAG cover)
(c) position your CVs 1 hex south east of Nadi with fighter range limited to 1 hex

Alfred

(in reply to Scott_USN)

Post #: 2833

RE: Dancing with the Stars - 12/8/2010 9:06:26 PM

Scott_USN

Posts: 715
Joined: 6/2/2004
From: Eagle River, Alaska USA
Status: offline

Unless they planned far ahead with that armor divison they are going to be hurting. With less than 60pp they will lose many many motorized support.

(in reply to Alfred)

Post #: 2834

RE: Dancing with the Stars - 12/8/2010 9:44:07 PM

witpqs

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

I concur with Alfred's advice. A couple of additional notes:

There is a distance issue if your carriers are just at Wellington. While obviously not exposing them to LBA attack, do not try to sneak up on Nadi. It will probably help if search finds you and they know you are coming. If they do panic and stop landing that will help your cause.
Even those PT boats can interrupt unloading and buy you time.
If they see everything moved to Nadi, they could stop unloading and move to Suva. So, make sure your fleet is there to forestall any such move.
Even ineffective air attacks can slow unloading.
If they get ashore but the ships bug out before unloading supply, that might be the best scenario!
Can you reload warships at Suva? If so, make it their home port so they don't go screaming across the Pacific in the wrong direction.

(in reply to Scott_USN)

Post #: 2835

RE: Dancing with the Stars - 12/8/2010 10:02:25 PM

Scott_USN

Posts: 715
Joined: 6/2/2004
From: Eagle River, Alaska USA
Status: offline

The only problem with moving CV to that location is putting them in LBA and CBA attacks. If they get hurt they most likely will not survive long.

Unless I am wrong about betty range. If I am not you may find attack from both in coordination. I don't think they will survive such a strike

The good thing with alfreds points is the SF is almost assured to strike a blow. But I see the carriers going down. Which getting out undamaged is less than likely regardless

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2836

RE: Dancing with the Stars - 12/8/2010 10:04:59 PM

Chickenboy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred
(c) position your CVs 1 hex south east of Nadi with fighter range limited to 1 hex

Disagree strongly, Alfred. This would put his CVs within striking range of IJN carrier aircraft, SCTF interdiction and possibly Netty activity out of Noumea (depending on retreat pathway). Bad idea for placement, particularly with their weakened air complement.

_____________________________

(in reply to Alfred)

Post #: 2837

RE: Dancing with the Stars - 12/8/2010 10:13:11 PM

Cap Mandrake

Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline

Everyone seems to be channeling Halsey

Suva has no AE's or AD's. In fact, her complement of ships include only two PT boats. AE Pyro was sunk. I evacuated the AD that was there. There is fuel.

All of the armor, all of the field artillery and two full US Army regiments are already on their way to Nadi along with the formidable 3rd Marine Defence Bn. I could probably spare another regiment but I wouldnt put it past the LYB's to do a second landing (which happened at New Scotland and eventually led to the loss of the island). I certainly agree that Nadi is the primary landing site as evidenced by the support troops there.

Regarding the idea letting the Japs see the approaching carriers...that seems like a good suggestion. The will be able to deduce that Wasp can't be in theater yet but I dont think they will have good intel on Yorktown, so they might be expecting 3 USN carriers plus a simultaneous threat of land based air from Fiji. It would require some serious self confidence to stand and fight.

Very interesting situation. These are the times when this game is the greatest computer wargame ever devised.

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2838

RE: Dancing with the Stars - 12/8/2010 10:20:10 PM

Cap Mandrake

Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline

Another interesting thing...the Japs are using carrier Zeroes to sweep over Fiji in large numbers and most if not all their Vals are attacking the airfields. It would nice to engage them while they were diverting these resources from CAP and naval attack.

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)

Post #: 2839

RE: Dancing with the Stars - 12/8/2010 10:24:22 PM

Scott_USN

Posts: 715
Joined: 6/2/2004
From: Eagle River, Alaska USA
Status: offline

I agree these are the turns that make it all worth it. this is the greatest wargame ever.

Whatever you two decide we will all be rooting for you in paradise pago pago in the rear with the gear fruity drinks and girls.

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)

Post #: 2840

RE: Dancing with the Stars - 12/8/2010 10:29:14 PM

Scott_USN

Posts: 715
Joined: 6/2/2004
From: Eagle River, Alaska USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

Another interesting thing...the Japs are using carrier Zeroes to sweep over Fiji in large numbers and most if not all their Vals are attacking the airfields. It would nice to engage them while they were diverting these resources from CAP and naval attack.

Another good reason to strike cv's from sea southwest of them. If they are still sweeping when you strike.... Taste just like chicken!

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)

Post #: 2841

RE: Dancing with the Stars - 12/8/2010 10:44:28 PM

Chickenboy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Scott_USN

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

Another interesting thing...the Japs are using carrier Zeroes to sweep over Fiji in large numbers and most if not all their Vals are attacking the airfields. It would nice to engage them while they were diverting these resources from CAP and naval attack.

Another good reason to strike cv's from sea southwest of them. If they are still sweeping when you strike.... Taste just like chicken!

You're assuming that your opponent will not / cannot react to the presence of naval assets by ordering a naval strike against you. If he did see the carriers / react, this will result in a direct carrier clash. The Allies are in a very weak offensive position vis a vis the carrier airwings. Not a good idea.

_____________________________

(in reply to Scott_USN)

Post #: 2842

RE: Dancing with the Stars - 12/9/2010 12:43:10 AM

Scott_USN

Posts: 715
Joined: 6/2/2004
From: Eagle River, Alaska USA
Status: offline

I don't disagree they are in a bad way with offensive strike aircraft to me getting the Surface Force to Nadi is worth the fight if those Crusiers close with that practically unguarded Landing Task Force it will be a turkey shoot. It is a huge gamble but with what intel we have if they are running sweep with 1/4 t0 1/3rd their fighters (think the A24s caused this) plus escorting plus capping they are going to be thin on defensive assests. A well escorted strike with the 20 odd bombers may be enough if surprise is gained.

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 2843

RE: Dancing with the Stars - 12/9/2010 1:14:38 AM

Chickenboy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Scott_USN

I don't disagree they are in a bad way with offensive strike aircraft to me getting the Surface Force to Nadi is worth the fight if those Crusiers close with that practically unguarded Landing Task Force it will be a turkey shoot. It is a huge gamble but with what intel we have if they are running sweep with 1/4 t0 1/3rd their fighters (think the A24s caused this) plus escorting plus capping they are going to be thin on defensive assests. A well escorted strike with the 20 odd bombers may be enough if surprise is gained.

I agree with you about the merits of the offensive SCTF to Nadi. This could be a worthwhile action.

I'm disagreeing with you about the merits of involving the carrier aircraft in the manner you've described. Too much Allied downside if you DON'T catch the Japs napping. If you don't catch the Japs napping, your pathetic 20 odd-bomber force will be swatted aside and you've got 3-4 IJN fleet CVs dropping an alpha strike on your decks. You lose three carriers. For want of a nail and all that...

_____________________________

(in reply to Scott_USN)

Post #: 2844

RE: Dancing with the stars - 12/9/2010 1:24:06 AM

Scott_USN

Posts: 715
Joined: 6/2/2004
From: Eagle River, Alaska USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: sprior

The big fly in the SAG ointment is/are the Bettys (Betties?) flying Naval Attack. How do we provide CAP over them? Contrariwise I say bring on the salsa. And can I have tortilla chips too please?

The Betty (torp) range is 17. They'll be unescorted >14. What is the range to Suva from Noumea? You shouldn't have to retreat too much to the East to be out of their range, IIRC.

I didn't see you answer the range on the betties before I asked my question. Nadi is 16 from Noumea 17 to Suva

Auckland to Nadi is 28 how long would that take with burning the boilers out of surface fleet?

See your point on being spotted before reaching strike range, However sometimes boldness pays off.

< Message edited by Scott_USN -- 12/9/2010 1:27:44 AM >

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 2845

RE: Dancing with the Stars - 12/9/2010 2:38:35 AM

Alfred

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred
(c) position your CVs 1 hex south east of Nadi with fighter range limited to 1 hex

Disagree strongly, Alfred. This would put his CVs within striking range of IJN carrier aircraft, SCTF interdiction and possibly Netty activity out of Noumea (depending on retreat pathway). Bad idea for placement, particularly with their weakened air complement.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one as I think 1 hex south east of Nadi is perfect.

The object of the exercise is to cripple Japanese offensive power in the Pacific. In the specific circumstances applicable to this game at this moment in time, that means destroying land maneouvre units and sea lift capacity. Destruction of the enemy carriers only fits into this imperative if all 4 are sunk off Fiji. As that is not possible it is immaterial if the Allies lose all 3 carriers provided the invasion force is destroyed. Reasons follow.

1. The Allied carrier force is inferior to the LYB carrier force. The 30 carrier strike aircraft will not destroy all 4 enemy carriers. Plus there is no meaningful land strike aircraft forthcoming from Suva to improve the weight of the strike package.

2. There is no meaningful Allied fighter strength available on Fiji to provide meaningful LRCAP over any Allied vessels contesting the landing. Thus the Allies are left with only the 69 Wildcats embarked on the 3 Allied carriers. That number is too few to simultaneously provide (a) LRCAP over SAG, (b) CAP over the carriers, and (c) escort the strike package against the LYB carriers.

3. Bettys from either Noumea or Luganville will be flying without Zero escorts and would first have to decide to bypass the Allied SAG contesting the Nadi landing before striking at the Allied carriers. There is therefore a chance they would only strike at the SAG which would have some LRCAP protection to shoot down the unescorted flying lighters.

4. Any damaged Allied carriers/escort ships will make Suva port. If necessary there is no impediment to them retreating due east towards Samoa.

5. One of the Allied carriers is British. IMHO it makes good sense to use them to draw upon themselves the LYB carrier strikes as my recommendation is for all Allied fighters to be on 100% CAP/LRCAP limited to a 1 hex range.

6. By putting the Allied strike package on a 1 hex range they will not strike at the enemy carriers. Even without Allied fighter escorts, this leaves them open to strike at the enemy transports at Nadi because enemy carrier Zeros are probably not tasked to LRCAP the beach. If on the other hand there are zeros so tasked to protect the beach, there will be fewer Zero escorts to accompany the enemy strike package against the Allied carriers.

7. It is a reasonable assumption that the LYBs have brought everything they can to invade Nadi. Hence the benefit of destroying this landing. By themselves the enemy carriers do not constitute a strategic threat. Without owning bases in Fiji and Samoa, in the future they can only raid and be met by Allied LBA. That is not a good return on investment/risk reward.

8. To Cap Mandrake's concern about a LYB landing behind the lines at Suva should he move to the sound of the guns at Nadi, I don't think that is really a valid concern. Fiji is not like New Caledonia. Firstly there are Allied bases closer to Fiji and than there were to New Caledonia, this allows for easier rotation of Allied naval units. Secondly, the enemy has fewer available resources (evidenced by no enemy surface TFs to bombard/accompany the Nadi landing plus no nearby airfields to launch escorted strike aircraft).

Yes the Allied carriers would be in some danger but they are quite expendable if the enemy sea lift capacity and land maneouvre units are destroyed. It will be many months before a powerful Allied carrier force can be put together to confront the LYB carriers. That possibility is not really improved by hiding the 3 Allied carriers from the current Fiji invasion.

Alfred

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 2846

RE: Dancing with the Stars - 12/9/2010 2:17:04 PM

Itdepends

Posts: 937
Joined: 12/12/2005
Status: offline

So- where's the SCTF- are you sure it isn't in theater- seems a bit strange to send that many transports in without something to soften up the natives.

(in reply to Alfred)

Post #: 2847

RE: Dancing with the Stars - 12/9/2010 3:05:17 PM

sprior

Posts: 8596
Joined: 6/18/2002
From: Portsmouth, UK
Status: offline

Recon seems to be something of a weak point for them.

_____________________________

"Grown ups are what's left when skool is finished."
"History started badly and hav been geting steadily worse."
- Nigel Molesworth.

(in reply to Itdepends)

Post #: 2848

RE: Dancing with the Stars - 12/9/2010 4:00:00 PM

asdicus

Posts: 260
Joined: 5/16/2002
From: Surrey,UK
Status: offline

Long-time lurker on this aar. Really enjoying the story so far - thanks to the writers for their efforts.

My view on the situation around Suva.

The japs potentially have 8 cv and 3 cvl plus cve ( less losses to date) they could bring to this party. If I were the japs I would aim for a important allied base knowing that the advantage in carriers will never be better for the japanese in the entire war. Draw out the allied carriers defeat them and then gain another 18 months of time before the allies can really go on the offensive. Suva is not really relevant to the battle(it is just bait) sinking the allied carriers is far more important.

On the other hand the allies have virtually no strike planes on the carriers so they really are just targets - they cannot make any really useful strikes except on undefended transports. Also they still have tbd not avengers for torp work and in july the usn fighter squadrons will increase from 27 to 36 planes ( a big jump).

My suggestion for the allies keep the carriers and surface ships out of the way for now. There are enough troops to put up a good longterm defense of suva/nadi. The japs have no nearby airbases so their carriers will have to cover the transports and they can't do that forever. Wait til july equip with avengers and larger usn fighter squadron and then assess the situation re a major carrier battle. Overall if it was me I would rather lose the entire suva garrison than get all my carriers sunk. Troops are aplenty new build carriers in 1942 early 43 are non existant.

(in reply to sprior)

Post #: 2849

RE: Dancing with the Stars - 12/9/2010 7:20:27 PM

Cap Mandrake

Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline

These observations after looking at the map:

1) The Jap carriers have moved clsoer to the landing group to provide LRCAP. This worked as they downed 8 or 9 of the A-24's and SB2U's but this is the classic "overworked piece". The Queen is guarding both a Knight a Bishop while "pretending" to be an offensive threat.

2) There are some probable surface groups lurking to the West. They could also be replenishment groups or even carrier groups hoping for an ambush.

3) The stream of bombers from Noumea IS NOT shutting down Suva airfield even without a CAP. They lost 4 today and the raid packets are getting smaller due to losses (>2 dozen Nells and Bettys in thsi op) and fatigue. Runway damage is down to 60. I move a single operable P-40B back to Suva and 3 P-40E's with trainees from Samoa. If the unescorted raids continue they will bring down some bombers. It the Zeroes come back from the carriers they will all perish. Sorry, can't be helped. I sent in 19 B-17E's to Suva. If they can get off the runway they will attack shipping at Nadi. They may not hit anything but they will give as good as they get vs. the Zeroes.....and they will really piss of the LYB's who will then go back to attcking Suva with carrier aircraft again...which is good.

4) I sent Enterprise back to pick up some P-39's (hoisted onto the deck ..I think that works..right?) to be flown off to Suva.