RE: Blood in the skies

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: Blood in the skies

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: Blood in the skies

Page: << < prev 154 155 [156] 157 158 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 8:13:13 AM

CaptBeefheart

Posts: 2301
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline

Wow, sorry to hear about this tactical defeat.

I think you can disband your fragments and then rebuild the entire squadron for a number of PPs. You might test it with one fragment to make sure it works. Anyway, you should be able to get all of those CVE VFs and VTs back in action within a couple of months if you have the PPs, airframes and pilots.

Not that you need my advice, but you should really play this up with Rader as a massive loss, and then hit him hard when and where he least expects it.

Cheers,
CC

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4651

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 11:06:03 AM

ny59giants

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

Shikuka - I first read of these attacks on Rader's AAR and was wondering why your CVEs were not up here?? They would have been protected from KB at least. You can have a size 9 AF there and could have taken your CVE fighters and placed them on CAP.

You seem to have placed all your eggs (CVEs) all in one basket (at one base). Why??

Tactical and Strategic planning: Time to reflect and decide where your assets all over the board are going to be used in regards to the North Pacific and the Japanese mainland. Right now his raiding CVs are preventing you from sending lightly escorted TFs from USA/Pearl to the South Pacific. IMO, this is diverting your attention away from Hokkaido and Honshu.

_____________________________

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4652

RE: DISASTER - 12/22/2011 11:46:18 AM

castor troy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Wow, you had me worried there for a moment. I thought something had gone badly wrong.

About the only thing that could really hurt you at this point is if you lost most of your fleet carriers and/or most of your good landing ships. You didn't, so you're fine. Even losing a zillion CVEs (which is a big morale hit, naturally), isn't going to really hurt you. You can work around it. You can be creative.

Unless I missed something, I see no reason you can't invade Honshu on schedule. So, am I missing something?

How many aircraft did rader lose on the day?

Now, before you turn turtle and withdraw into your shell, is there an opportunity to strike here? Did rader lose so many aircraft that he's neutered for a bit? Can you attack his fleet?

I totally disagree here. Have experienced it myselve and have seen it often enough in all kind of AARs, the CVE are VITAL for any Allied operation in areas where many big enemy airfields overlap, means mainly the Philipines and Japan itselve. The fleet carriers alone are by far not enough to be anywhere a real cover for your invasion on Japan, they can�t even defend themselve for two or three days against anything comparable we�ve seen in this combat report. Heck, my last PBEM saw me having more fighters on my CVE fleet than on my fleet carriers alltogether, even though my losses were minimal. I had to find out the hard way that even 1500+ fighters on my carrier fleets (CV, CVL and CVE together) massed in an area were not enough to hold out for more than one day (actually I suffered on day one already and fled full speed). This with 2/3 Hellcats and 1/3 Corsairs on all my carriers, no crap like Wildcats.

If the Allied loses all those CVE, the Japanese actually have a fair chance to kill the rest of the fleet too if the Allied attempt to come close enough for another time. Just my 2c.

_____________________________

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 4653

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 11:52:38 AM

castor troy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

What to do with those fragments...nearly 300 a/c now belongs to frangments...they cannot take replacements....what shall i do?

I would disband them and use both the ac (if not the crappy FM2) and the pilots as replacements.

_____________________________

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4654

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 1:34:21 PM

Gridley380

Posts: 464
Joined: 12/20/2011
Status: offline

GreyJoy, I feel your pain, but note that he still took twice as many aircraft losses as you did. In fact if I read the summary report right he's lost more than twice as many A/C as you overall! He's got to be hurting for pilots and planes.

I vote for invading as soon as possible, putting your own CV/CVL force in place to intercept KB when it comes calling, as it will have to do. Attack quickly, before he has time to recover from the damage his air groups have taken.

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 4655

RE: DISASTER - 12/22/2011 1:54:06 PM

Canoerebel

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy
I totally disagree here...

I didn't say that CVEs weren't important and very helpful. I said that under the circumstances, GJ can proceed with his invasion plans. He won't need to risk his fleet carriers. For goodness sakes, his invaison beaches are one to two hexes away from a friendly level nine airfield. That, and the fact that he has two-day turns and plenty of APA, AP, AKA, AK, LSD and LST will permit him to do what needs to be done. It won't be a bloodless coup, but it can be done.

< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 12/22/2011 1:56:21 PM >

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 4656

RE: DISASTER - 12/22/2011 2:24:58 PM

cwDeici

Posts: 70
Joined: 12/6/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy
I had to find out the hard way that even 1500+ fighters on my carrier fleets (CV, CVL and CVE together) massed in an area were not enough to hold out for more than one day (actually I suffered on day one already and fled full speed). This with 2/3 Hellcats and 1/3 Corsairs on all my carriers, no crap like Wildcats.

It sounds like he hasn't lost much vis a vis the invasion, with 1.5k carrier fighters hacking it for less than a day.
Hokkaido as an airbase will do for launching a conquest of Honshu, but should he keep his CVs back in reserve or hope to ambush the enemy CVs during an invasion?

Anyway, it's obvious now that Rader is playing to win, not to lose by as little as possible... it might be be good to be even more cautious, or to set a trap, but the invasion will surely throw him off-balance by forcing him to react rather than take the initiative!

< Message edited by cwDeici -- 12/22/2011 6:29:59 PM >

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 4657

RE: DISASTER - 12/22/2011 2:28:06 PM

Canoerebel

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

GJ can speak to his own case, naturally, but I suspect he would keep his carriers back. The only thing that can keep him from victory is to lose the ability to supply his army and airforce on Hokkaido. If he lost his carriers, but rader still had his, the situation would become dicey.

(in reply to cwDeici)

Post #: 4658

RE: DISASTER - 12/22/2011 2:37:46 PM

cwDeici

Posts: 70
Joined: 12/6/2011
Status: offline

I agree, but those carriers are definitely coming for Greyjoy's carriers, it's hard to feel safe when your enemy displays that kind of desperation and skill... not that emotion should enter into it if possible.

Thought about setting up an ambush, Greyjoy? I'm thinking he might try this again... it's not like he has anything to lose if he can't shut down your logistics.
... then again I suppose just setting up surface pickets will do the job by accepting a higher attrition rate.

< Message edited by cwDeici -- 12/22/2011 6:30:47 PM >

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 4659

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 2:41:52 PM

USSAmerica

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Hi GreyJoy,

I haven't kept up on this AAR, but keep hearing good things about it elsewhere in the forum. Anything interesting happening in the last few game months?

Regards,

Chickenboy

Evil, evil man!

_____________________________

Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me

Artwork by The Amazing Dixie

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 4660

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 2:42:27 PM

USSAmerica

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

Yup guys...after a good sleep and a cup of coffea everything is fine again :-)

See u later with some updates

That's the ticket!

_____________________________

Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me

Artwork by The Amazing Dixie

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4661

RE: DISASTER - 12/22/2011 2:44:38 PM

Vetamur

Posts: 191
Joined: 10/16/2006
Status: offline

I wonder if you can use this tragedy to set up an ambush.. make it look like you havent learned your lesson.. set some bait..but put your own carriers in a position to strike when he moves up the KB..

just thinking here..

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 4662

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 2:44:38 PM

witpqs

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I am glad to summarize the rule to clear up the abundant and near-perpetual uncertainty that attaches to this rule.

The depth of the water has nothing to do with carrier operations.

The presence of land has nothing to do with carrier operations.

It is only the presence of a base that affects carrier operations. In a base hex, fleet carrier (CV and CVL) air operations are halved. CVE air operations are unaffected.

So, a fleet carrier operating in a hex that is part land and part water is not affecte. But a fleet carrier operating in a base hex is affected.

What he said!

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 4663

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 2:57:55 PM

Canoerebel

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

I need to state something publicly - an apology that's necessary here because the conduct I am apologizing for occurred in this thread.

Much more than a year ago game-time, I criticized rader pretty harshly for two things: (1) abusing a newb with a no-holds-barred assault on China and India, and (2) marching a huge army across the Owen-Stanley mountains.

At the time, I didn't know rader at all. I had never read any of his AARs, nor had I had any contact with him in the forums. I wasn't aware that he was a regular and well-regarded member of the community. To me, he was simply an experienced player harshly abusing a newb.

In reading his companion thread to this game, I've come to realize that rader is quite a gent - even-tempered, cordial, and a good sport. And there's plenty other evidence to boot; for instance, the high regard with which GJ holds rader.

So, I do hereby apologize to rader (should he ever read this far into GJ's AAR) for being pretty harsh in my comments. Rader and GJ are good guys who are producing wonderfully entertaining mirror AARs.

< Message edited by Canoerebel -- 12/22/2011 2:59:34 PM >

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 4664

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 3:03:50 PM

GreyJoy

Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

Sorry guys, i'm a bit late today with the updates...having some hard days at work...lot of things to do before xmas....

But i'll be back on track tonight after work...

...just one note and then i have to leave...

My CVEs were supposed to operate at their full potentials in Uruppu jima because they are CVEs and not CVs...so i was counting on that....i knew i was in a danger area...and right because of that i kept all my CVEs togheder in 7 different TFs covering my invasion fleet (APA, AKAs, LSTs etc etc). don't know why the CAP performed so badly...radar didn't work as good as it should have been and it seemed that all my fighters were caught out of position during the first 2 or 3 decisive raids...think it was a bad dice and roll this time

However live and learn...

I will invade Honshu...even if it was the last thing to do in this game

NO FEAR!!!!

later friends...

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 4665

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 3:07:03 PM

Karsten

Posts: 31
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

Yup guys...after a good sleep and a cup of coffea everything is fine again :-)

See u later with some updates

Thats the right spirit!

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4666

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 3:07:22 PM

GreyJoy

Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I need to state something publicly - an apology that's necessary here because the conduct I am apologizing for occurred in this thread.

Much more than a year ago game-time, I criticized rader pretty harshly for two things: (1) abusing a newb with a no-holds-barred assault on China and India, and (2) marching a huge army across the Owen-Stanley mountains.

At the time, I didn't know rader at all. I had never read any of his AARs, nor had I had any contact with him in the forums. I wasn't aware that he was a regular and well-regarded member of the community. To me, he was simply an experienced player harshly abusing a newb.

In reading his companion thread to this game, I've come to realize that rader is quite a gent - even-tempered, cordial, and a good sport. And there's plenty other evidence to boot; for instance, the high regard with which GJ holds rader.

So, I do hereby apologize to rader (should he ever read this far into GJ's AAR) for being pretty harsh in my comments. Rader and GJ are good guys who are producing wonderfully entertaining mirror AARs.

+1

Rader is a gentleman. Sporty and clever and, above all, i know consider him a good friend.
We've known each other during this year and i can tell you for sure that he's the game-partner everyone would want to have

As always, CR, your politeness and education are and example for us all. Thx for being as you are!

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 4667

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 3:22:27 PM

jeffk3510

Posts: 4132
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

quote:

ORIGINAL: jeffk3510

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

I don't fear the KB right now...in fact i was hunting her (or her ghost)...i fear those LBA masses...

What would have happened if....

A6M3a Zero x 114
�� A6M5 Zero x 103
�� G4M1 Betty x 120
�� G4M2 Betty x 28
�� N1K1-J George x 541
�� P1Y1 Frances x 113

arrived over my DS...followed by the KB raid? How many of my CVs would have survived?

I would never suggest going head to head with them within range of his LBA. However you seriously attrited his KB airgroups during the Tulagi/New Guinea campaign in 43, a perfect time for your CVs to strike.........but they were sitting in PH at the time "Upgrading". BTW (as you will have probably realised after the last bad turn) ship AA upgrades are pretty much pointless as Flak in the game is about a tenth as effective compared to the real war.

I would agree with that 100%

Hmmmm what version are we refering to? or are we saying the latest Beta version is borked too?

David-

By no means was I saying it is borked at all....just an observation.. Love this game and everything about it.

By far and away the best war game, in my mind.

_____________________________

Life is tough. The sooner you realize that, the easier it will be.

Currently chasing three kids around the Midwest.

(in reply to Crackaces)

Post #: 4668

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 3:42:26 PM

witpqs

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: jeffk3510

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

quote:

ORIGINAL: jeffk3510

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

I don't fear the KB right now...in fact i was hunting her (or her ghost)...i fear those LBA masses...

What would have happened if....

A6M3a Zero x 114
�� A6M5 Zero x 103
�� G4M1 Betty x 120
�� G4M2 Betty x 28
�� N1K1-J George x 541
�� P1Y1 Frances x 113

arrived over my DS...followed by the KB raid? How many of my CVs would have survived?

I would never suggest going head to head with them within range of his LBA. However you seriously attrited his KB airgroups during the Tulagi/New Guinea campaign in 43, a perfect time for your CVs to strike.........but they were sitting in PH at the time "Upgrading". BTW (as you will have probably realised after the last bad turn) ship AA upgrades are pretty much pointless as Flak in the game is about a tenth as effective compared to the real war.

I would agree with that 100%

Hmmmm what version are we refering to? or are we saying the latest Beta version is borked too?

David-

By no means was I saying it is borked at all....just an observation.. Love this game and everything about it.

By far and away the best war game, in my mind.

Various peoples' observations about ship-borne flak were taken and prompted a recalculation of flak values for DaBabes. I forget if ground-based flak was done also, or if perhaps it had already been done for stock scenarios. The same was done for surface guns, and was very recently done for aerial bombs. Those of us playing Babes scenarios will have to see how it works out over the long term, but at the very least the effort normalized all of the values so they are correct in relation to each other.

As Rader and GreyJoy are playing Sceanrio 2 they certainly don't have the benefit of those efforts.

(in reply to jeffk3510)

Post #: 4669

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 3:50:19 PM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jeffk3510

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

quote:

ORIGINAL: jeffk3510

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

I don't fear the KB right now...in fact i was hunting her (or her ghost)...i fear those LBA masses...

What would have happened if....

A6M3a Zero x 114
�� A6M5 Zero x 103
�� G4M1 Betty x 120
�� G4M2 Betty x 28
�� N1K1-J George x 541
�� P1Y1 Frances x 113

arrived over my DS...followed by the KB raid? How many of my CVs would have survived?

I would never suggest going head to head with them within range of his LBA. However you seriously attrited his KB airgroups during the Tulagi/New Guinea campaign in 43, a perfect time for your CVs to strike.........but they were sitting in PH at the time "Upgrading". BTW (as you will have probably realised after the last bad turn) ship AA upgrades are pretty much pointless as Flak in the game is about a tenth as effective compared to the real war.

I would agree with that 100%

Hmmmm what version are we refering to? or are we saying the latest Beta version is borked too?

David-

By no means was I saying it is borked at all....just an observation.. Love this game and everything about it.

By far and away the best war game, in my mind.

quote:

Fast Reply

The number of large anti-aircraft guns used to defend German cites against Allied bombers is quoted as 18,000. One commentator states that the Germans probably lost the Battle of Stalingrad by defending German skies against Allied bombers

Even against the combination of German fighters (some days 600 were available) and numerous anti-aircraft guns , usually 95 percent of the bombers dropped their bombs on or near their assigned targets and returned in re-usable condition to England. (Very few Allied raids had bomber losses higher than 20 percent. "Terrible losses" as viewed by bomber air crews, and "not nearly enough losses" as viewed by the Germans.)

Comments from Jerry L Brewer who did U.S. 90 mm AAA in Japan during the Korean police action. One final thought on AA guns against modern aircraft. It was taking your faithful old shotgun out to shoot birds flying by at 100 MPH. German author Werner Muller in his book "The Heavy Flak Guns" said,"Based on average monthly ammunition consumption in 1944, it took 16,000 rounds of 88mm gunfire to bring down one four engine bomber."
Mr. Mullers book contains details on German AA guns and fire control systems. It is published by Schiffer Publishing Ltd. of Westchester Pa.ISBN: 0-8870-263-1

Available by e-mail through Barnes & Noble

So 10% overall flak effectiveness is about right doing cursory research ...

Ok back to GreyJoy and the war ..

(in reply to jeffk3510)

Post #: 4670

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 4:47:15 PM

Nemo121

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

Sometimes you just wish people would actually be open and state things publicly instead of snivelling behind the scenes....

< Message edited by Nemo121 -- 12/22/2011 5:52:11 PM >

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Crackaces)

Post #: 4671

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 4:54:48 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bigred

quote:

ORIGINAL: ADB123

quote:

how is it possible that my fighters on the CVEs performed so badly?! they didn't even engage the raids...look at the first raid....10 fighters lost on each side and that's all.... the CVEs don't suffer the "sitting in base" penalty right?

Unless something has changed in the Betas, any CV, CVEs included, fly fewer planes if they are in a shore/base hex. Only the AI is immune.

As an aside - all of the "ammo explosion" messages are a good lesson for everyone who wants to use their CVEs as Combat Carriers...

Good luck -

I read somewhere that CVEs in shallow water fly at 100%operations. CV/CVLs are cut to 50% operational launch ability.
Another question GJ. What was the size of the CVE TF?
Should we try to keep the CVE TFs under ship size of 14? I recall something about a CV TF "effected by more than 14 ships".
What was the commanders naval/air rating?
And what is the name of the commander.
Please excuse me for being obsessive analytical.

guys, they changed this a long, long time ago. CVs of all types are reduced to 50% air operations ONLY in port hexes now, not in all coastal hexes like the old days.

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to bigred)

Post #: 4672

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 5:14:26 PM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

quote:

ORIGINAL: bigred

quote:

ORIGINAL: ADB123

quote:

how is it possible that my fighters on the CVEs performed so badly?! they didn't even engage the raids...look at the first raid....10 fighters lost on each side and that's all.... the CVEs don't suffer the "sitting in base" penalty right?

Unless something has changed in the Betas, any CV, CVEs included, fly fewer planes if they are in a shore/base hex. Only the AI is immune.

As an aside - all of the "ammo explosion" messages are a good lesson for everyone who wants to use their CVEs as Combat Carriers...

Good luck -

I read somewhere that CVEs in shallow water fly at 100%operations. CV/CVLs are cut to 50% operational launch ability.
Another question GJ. What was the size of the CVE TF?
Should we try to keep the CVE TFs under ship size of 14? I recall something about a CV TF "effected by more than 14 ships".
What was the commanders naval/air rating?
And what is the name of the commander.
Please excuse me for being obsessive analytical.

guys, they changed this a long, long time ago. CVs of all types are reduced to 50% air operations ONLY in port hexes now, not in all coastal hexes like the old days.

Think the question is base hex not port per se .. thus launching from a hex with an atoll will effect operations .. I observed this with r6 ..

quote:

Air operations by aircraft carriers are limited if the aircraft carrier is in a base hex. Aircraft launching search, CAP or strike Missions from a carrier in a base hex will only launch 50% of the normal amount they would have launched. P. 167

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 4673

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 5:30:34 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

wouldn't that be only if the atoll actually has a base?

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to Crackaces)

Post #: 4674

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 5:31:52 PM

Canoerebel

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

Well, I'll re-state the actual rule for the second time in two days, since posts subsequent to my original have misstated the rule:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I am glad to summarize the rule to clear up the abundant and near-perpetual uncertainty that attaches to this rule.

The depth of the water has nothing to do with carrier operations.

The presence of land has nothing to do with carrier operations.

It is only the presence of a base that affects carrier operations. In a base hex, fleet carrier (CV and CVL) air operations are halved. CVE air operations are unaffected.

So, a fleet carrier operating in a hex that is part land and part water is not affecte. But a fleet carrier operating in a base hex is affected.

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 4675

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 5:38:37 PM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

wouldn't that be only if the atoll actually has a base?

Exactly ..but at least in my experience last turn in my game -- that atoll can be an empty base .. as long as it is a base hex ...

(in reply to HansBolter)

Post #: 4676

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 5:46:51 PM

witpqs

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crackaces

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

wouldn't that be only if the atoll actually has a base?

Exactly ..but at least in my experience last turn in my game -- that atoll can be an empty base .. as long as it is a base hex ...

CVEs are not affected at all. Bases only affect CVs and CVL.

(in reply to Crackaces)

Post #: 4677

RE: Blood in the skies - 12/22/2011 6:37:27 PM

GreyJoy

Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

Nemo i don't get what you mean...

Anyway guys, here we are with another turn

10, 11 July 1944

we heavily bombed Ominato hoping to find some damaged planes....not a single plane torched despite 2 days with more than 280 bombers involved

Anyway....KB retired southwest and passed again over my subs....guess what? not a single contact

We managed to get some badly damaged CVEs back to Shikuka and some more are trying to be saved at Uruppu.
I cannot change my disposition right now...it's mistaken as it is...i know...too exposed...it's a mistake to use Uruppu as an HUB...but i cannot move everything out in 1 turn...so i've tried to organize Uruppu defences in a better way...more spitsVIII transfered there and less crappy Hellcats....
Shikuka has been given 300 fighters now in order to protect it from any attempt to catch my damaged CVEs...

Tomorrow we'll hit Gifu, targetting the last operative KI-83 factory, along with Tojo and Tony production. Heavy escort ordered (more than 250 planes on escort and more 200 on sweep to defend 330 4Es)...
I'm really running out of 4Es....cannot go on a lot more with these loss ratio...

Northern Honshu has become a fortress....my BBs keep on bombing the bases there but every day the results are worse....CD guns everywhere and i presume forts up to 9 everywhere.... guys...we all know it will be bloody as hell to land there....we'll land in the face of 500k japanese....my recon has spotted more than 6000 vehicles...

But we also know it will be fun...

less than 2 months to go before the invasion.... my CVs are re-grouping and re-organizing at PH....they will be equipped with the new Hellcats5 very soon and in 2 weeks 3 new british CVs will join the party.

As stated i won't use my CVs to cover the landings...i'll use them to protect my flanks against his KB... i'll devote more than 2000 fighters for LRCAP the landing sites...i'll lose tons of ships...i know...but i'm well ready to suffer...i think i got used to take beatings

Unfortunately from today we'll slow down a lot...1 turn per day if we're lucky...Rader will be pretty busy these holidays

Ok...in 3/4 hiurs we'll see how our mission against Gifu has gone.... see you later

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 4678

RE: DISASTER - 12/22/2011 6:38:12 PM

GreyJoy

Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

GJ can speak to his own case, naturally, but I suspect he would keep his carriers back. The only thing that can keep him from victory is to lose the ability to supply his army and airforce on Hokkaido. If he lost his carriers, but rader still had his, the situation would become dicey.

you know me

(in reply to Canoerebel)

Post #: 4679

RE: DISASTER - 12/22/2011 6:44:37 PM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

quote:

Anyway....KB retired southwest and passed again over my subs....guess what? not a single contact

Somebody with experience chime in .. but I do not think the code checks for passing over the top of a submarine but rather it seems to check if a TF ends a phase in the same hex as a submarines. Thus sub's do not act as pickets in WitP AE but more as "land mines" [you have to step on them or land on them so to speak ] Thus, those 8 hexes away launch points are pretty critical to station submarines .. as well as places that teh KB would get away to at full and mission speeds ..

Just a thought but somebody who really knows what's going on inside the game might comment .. these are just my observations of 210 plus turns of play ..

(in reply to GreyJoy)

Post #: 4680