Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

n01487477(Damian) Vs. Nemo121

 
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 >> n01487477(Damian) Vs. Nemo121 Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
n01487477(Damian) Vs. Nemo121 - 4/12/2013 2:38:05 AM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		[edit] Nemo121 - has kindly decided to take over from Floyd. He's kicked my butt in previous games and I don't expect anything less in this one ... but at least, I have naval superiority for a bit ;-0

I say potential post-game because my Tracker mate has to weigh his options after enduring 252 days of pain with little relief, all of which culminated on the 253 day with a really nasty turn of events. But more on that later...

Let me digress to where the war began and how it all fell apart for my long suffering, but good humored foe. Forgive me for any omissions or mistakes in chronology ...

The parallel dimension of the Pacific was invoked with a mod molded out of the scenario 1 template, JWE's ASW mod and much harder economics for me including; multiplier changes, resource accumulation at longer distances to the Home Is. pilots starting at 20, no freebie planes, more difficult R&D etc. The Allies got a little more supply in China, but otherwise everything else was static.

I prayed to the gods of witp, sank a few warm sake's for good measure and waited for Dec 7 to roll in ... kicking the tires and lighting the fires (yes a bad top-gun ref.)I threw KB into the fray at Pearl and got some heavy doubts from the gods of war. So, not sinking any BB's I drank more sake and threw them in for a second wave..failure smacked me down hard again. The gods were laughing at me. Throwing away the sake bottle,I turned my back on those fickle entities and turned my rage in an all out offensive on my unsuspecting foe. I'll show those electrons who's boss!

Later FOW revealed that I had actually sunk the California at Pearl and Pennsylvania at sea a little later. I felt some remorse, but I was on a roll and it's hard to reconcile after such betrayal.

In Malaysia I landed at Kota Bharu, and then leap frogged down to Kuantan and eventually Mersing. Singapore fell Jan 12 '42 and the British & Dutch had escaped with their tails between their legs. Yes, the British BB's weren't sunk and remained a clear and present danger to all op's. But not without taking severe losses across the SRA first near Guiuan and Cagayan around the 26/12 and then great losses especially Sth of Denpassar on the 9/1 when mini-KB went to take care of fleeing transports from Soerabaja.

This was after taking Palembang just after the fall of Singapore and then landed at Semarang(Java) and quickly split the Dutch into a Nth-south divide. With their fait accompl, a task accomplished by taking Borneo and the Celebes out of action beforehand, I moved to the planned invasion of Australia. Just to back up a bit, Soerabaja ended up with all industry destroyed. Something, that fueled my chagrin.

Meanwhile it was all pretty quiet cat and mouse in the pacific. The usual capture of Rabaul and Port Moresby was more by good fortune than design.I had been ruminating for some time on whether to actually bother with these bases. It hung heavily on my mind and the indecision lingered while I gathered my troops in Truk.
Meanwhile, Mini-KB had been doing a lot of the heavy lifting up until this point with escorting some BB runs into Ceylon to keep the British quiet and runs to the Nth of Australia to sink fleeing ships and keep the Allies land based. The capture of Port Blair and Rangoon early Jan helped these efforts immensely.
A failed attempt to land on Attu Is, SW of Ceylon, still yielded results drawing out some BB's which were scuppered by my following mini-KB. This is the last real action in this region as I felt the British had been dealt with as some of the British CV's had been holed in previous runs.

Later, having herded some CA/CL/DD's using my red cattle dogs "mini-kb" from the Darwin region into the awaiting jaws of the Abattoir "KB" lingering SE of Rossel Is. I decided that it was worth the effort if nothing else but to draw out those American CV's.

So, at the same time, I struck Darwin with the troops that had just taken Soerabaja, I landed on Rabaul, Port Moresby and then down the Island chain to Suva. Suva was taken fairly quickly and I moved out to Pago Pago. Sometime later the Allies landed a small force on Pago, not enough to take the Is. though. Accompanied by some Allied CV, I went hunting, The Yorktown was found and sunk late April '42 E of Auckland. Additional searching was put on hold by fuel considerations. I was in trouble logistically. Fuel and supplies were at a premium, If only the Allies had known how close I was to having no operational capacity. I was mad at myself because I had the chance to go after the fleeing American CV's heading NE back to Pearl...a mistake I thought might come back to bite me.
Back on Pago, I was in the process of destroying the units when I decided to take the honey trap which is Noumea.
Marching troops down from Koumac, then having to bring more in let the New Caledonian expedition go much longer than I liked. Fuel arrive at Suva just in the nick of time to resupply KB and sight a heavy Allied TF looking to resupply New Caledonia. All the transports were wiped out by flights or subsequent naval action off of Noumea. Intel indicated that no new troops offloaded and it was a major victory.

Over in Nth Australia just before the landings on Rabaul, I took Port Headland and drove inland from Darwin until a perimeter had been established. Then from Port Headland an amphib assault of Carnarvon yielded that base and my troops drove south. CV Junyo was struck by multiple torpedo's from the dutch SS, which have proved to be a pain in this campaign. CV Junyo made it to Port Headland and disbanded for long repairs. Port Lvls had to be built and AR's were dispatched. Eventually, she limped to Koepang and is as I write in Batavia en route to Singapore.
The Allies fought back by retaking Carnarvon with another amphib TF in a period of lull when mini-kb was back at Soerabaja, cutting off a Div that was on the outskirts of Geraldton. The retreat back to Carnarvon has been harassed by LB and LCU's. The Allies had caught me with my pants down and I am still paying the price for that fumble.

Meanwhile, with KB having to return to Rabaul for minor repairs and then splitting off Zuikaku and Shokaku to Kobe for upgrades to radar etc, Noumea fell and the region became quieter, but defeat was stolen from the Jaws of victory, Troops from Noumea were sent to Pago but were turned back 2 days from Port with a large American fleet arriving. Pago was taken, LB from Suva has kept the airfield suppressed and the CVL Shoho was left in the region to patrol Pago and the surrounds. She has proved deadly to replenishing TF's heading for Pago. But essentially, I can't keep this region much longer with the long supply/fuel chain.

So, while a lot of this operational report looks like it was one way traffic, Floyd has kept fighting back and putting his forces into harms way, turning the screws on me when he got the chance but as you all know there is not much that can stop the IJN in the first few months.

Then came the Allied hail mary ...to take the Kuriles in mid-July '42... an audacious plan... and that will be the subject for tomorrow's post ;-)





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by n01487477 -- 4/22/2013 2:02:28 AM >

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java
Post #: 1
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/12/2013 4:25:08 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		DAMN. Like the ratio of your losses to his!

Signed up as a reader SIR!

_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 2
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/12/2013 2:41:54 PM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
DAMN. Like the ratio of your losses to his!
Signed up as a reader SIR!

Thanks ... well the good news is the game is proceeding and Floyd is dodging, ducking and diving .. but more on that later. I'm still about 30 days behind the actual game and I'll catch up slowly over the course of the next week.

The focus of this AAR for the next 30 days of game-play will be primarily in the Kuriles as I hope this will be interesting for the readers.

16 July '42
Prior to this, I had spotted some forces coming from the East, and as Floyd later told me he was lingering waiting for loading to end.

The next 2 days saw heavy losses of aircraft for me and some heavy losses for the Allies. Seeing the BB's heavily damaged or sunk I was placing my forces for a nice surface engagement.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 3
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/12/2013 3:17:38 PM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		18-19 July, '42
Then came the SCTF encounters, two days of them. Yamato was severely damaged on the 18th but it was worth the effort of using Full Speed in and out forces.

After the first two days of heavy aerial losses, they were rested mostly for the BB's to have Zero-Oscar coverage and replenishment.

Bombardments did the business.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 4
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/12/2013 3:37:40 PM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		20-21 July, '42
A day of nothing followed by KB hitting Uruppu-jima again. I had made sure not to vector into the almost stationary Allied CV's.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 5
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/12/2013 4:10:12 PM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		It was about this time that I realized that the Allies had not offloaded any planes and that I had possibly sunk all of them on transports by my BB's earlier in the piece. I also noted that even at Shimushiri-jima offloading seemed to be taking an age.

Floyd and I exchanged emails later about offloading supplies; seems that he had had a large deal of problems with it and was a result of poor initial loading as well as the engine wanting to offload troops rather than supply and aircraft. Anyway, had I not sunk his transports with aircraft this battle could have gone another direction & it wouldn't have mattered. But given the need for quick offload in the initial days ... it was a crucial mistake that I think Floyd would play completely differently next time.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 6
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/12/2013 4:18:21 PM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		Time for some sleep ZZZzzz. More tomorrow. It has gone badly for Floyd, but honestly had he had more BB's here, offloaded in a better fashion and got a CAP up quickly, this would have been a much more even fight.

This might seem like folly on his part but I actually see it as a possibility that should be explored more. Sure it may take half the US navy but if he had started by not delaying his approach and giving me time to scramble into position, taking 3-5 bases instead of two. The interlocking of air, would have made naval operations a much more dangerous proposition for me.

Ultimately, I would have had to make BB runs to destroy supplies and wade through the gambit of SS's and air attacks.

Lastly, this would have meant that I couldn't cover other area's which are vulnerable to attack.

More thoughts tomorrow, as I bleed him a bit more ;-)

< Message edited by n01487477 -- 4/13/2013 12:07:34 AM >

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 7
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/13/2013 12:07:03 AM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		25 July - 5 August





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by n01487477 -- 4/13/2013 12:36:32 AM >

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 8
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/13/2013 1:03:43 AM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		A second bite of the Cherry.

6 - 7 August ' 42




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 9
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/13/2013 1:06:21 AM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		8 August, '42
Bad play on my part. No sweeps, bad weather, bad co-ordination due to some bad leader choices and resulting heavy losses. Oh, I did sink a fair amount of AK's though ;-)




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 10
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/13/2013 1:31:50 AM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		Damian, there are room for a zillion opinions, but I'd say it's nearly impossible for the Allies to land in the Kuriles in mid '42 and hope to make it stick - at least against an experience opponent. It's just too hard to keep the LOC open and too close to the Japanese homeland. From my own experience and from what I've seen in other games, early Kuriles landings against a good and experienced opponent nearly alway succeed early, then turn into "lost cause" maroonings. So I don't think your opponent would have succeeded even if he had loaded properly and brought BBs and aircraft.

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 11
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/13/2013 5:02:25 AM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Damian, there are room for a zillion opinions, but I'd say it's nearly impossible for the Allies to land in the Kuriles in mid '42 and hope to make it stick - at least against an experience opponent. It's just too hard to keep the LOC open and too close to the Japanese homeland. From my own experience and from what I've seen in other games, early Kuriles landings against a good and experienced opponent nearly alway succeed early, then turn into "lost cause" maroonings. So I don't think your opponent would have succeeded even if he had loaded properly and brought BBs and aircraft.

CR -
I do agree with you, but I'm not 100% convinced that in a scenario 1 game this couldn't be pulled off by a very good Allied player bringing 3x more than enough and getting a little more luck than my opponent got. [edit] I've been lucky-unfortunate to play Nemo121 ... I know we can differ on this as I'm not an experienced Allied campaigner, but as a pretty good Japanese commander, I can see how this could work or prove so costly, tip the game in the Allied favor much more quickly.

I should really play the green machine, some time soon.

Actually, Floyd is a pretty good player usually, I've played him in numerous scenario's, but even he knows that this had ended in a train wreck. Something he doesn't want to look at, but also something he can't take his eyes off. He has been good about it all and I appreciate that. It is going to be a long way back, but time is on his side and I'm a slowly dimming light. Depending on the next turn or three, he'll decide if he wants to continue to return turns waiting for his '43 CV's. I hope he does, but the game is about having fun and learning and 300+ turns are a long wait.

Either way, it has taken my eye off other theaters; which if he hadn't lost so much beforehand would be in jeopardy now.

< Message edited by n01487477 -- 4/13/2013 5:09:00 AM >

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 12
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/13/2013 6:20:27 AM   
Cribtop


Posts: 3890
Joined: 8/10/2008
From: Lone Star Nation
Status: offline 		Very bloody but very cool!

_____________________________


(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 13
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/13/2013 6:38:16 AM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline 		Interesting move by your opponent. One he surely regrets now!

Do you know what LCUs he landed? By glancing through his losses I can´t find anything critical? Presuming the NC makes it home the only significant naval losses are the Nevada and 4 APs? I would personally mourn the 4 APs more than the Nevada.

(in reply to Cribtop)
Post #: 14
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/13/2013 2:05:02 PM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline 		To be honest i think that if the allies pull this kind of invasion while the KB is operating far away...say Oz or DEI, and the allies bring some 500k supplies with them, Japan is screwed, even in 1942. Japan doesn't start with big AFs in that region and usually the sentais are busy fighting in Burma, Oz, DEI or Solomons in the summer of 42. If the allies manage to land there and estabilish a good CAP (say some Marine Wildcats and some P-40s) over their landing sites, it's gonna be impossible for Japan to dislodge a dug in American division from one of those rocks. Say you bring the Americal, along with the I US Corp, a couple of Artillery regiments and a tank regiments... behind 4 forts at Uruppu Jiima... how in the world the japs can hope to counterland and conquer the island before october 1942?

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 15
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/13/2013 2:31:46 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		If it was done in late September or preferably in October '42, then he would have winter to help him survive. I look at this as a lesson that if you go here, you need more bases that extend Allied control even more to the east. I would have avoided Paramushiro-jima, but taken the four bases from Onnekotan-jima to Shimushiri-jima. Place at least a regiment to a division with needed support at each and supply last for a month or so. Combat load the xAP/APs with very little supply and lots of xAKs with just supplies and some with aircraft. The xAKs would be sacrificed, but it could be done.

_____________________________


(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 16
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/13/2013 2:41:54 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		I'll weigh in once more, briefly, and then bow out so that I don't hijack the thread.

I'm confident when I say that a major Allied invasion of the Kuriles in summer '42, even if successful at first, is doomed to fail. (I concur with Michael that one in autumn might succeed, though even that would be tough against a good opponent). The biggest problem is that these are small bases, so you can't stock enough supply due to the limits on small bases. It is quite possible for a good Japanese player to react strongly within a week to ten days. Then, further out - weeks three to six - it becomes seriously impractical to impossible for the Allies to feed supply into these bases in the face of frequent bombardments, aerial bombings, and the presence of lots of subs and the KB.

I've seen it tried. I've tried it later myself, discovering how hard it is even in '43. July '42? No way, unless I'm playing a young'n.

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 17
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/13/2013 3:01:39 PM   
Cribtop


Posts: 3890
Joined: 8/10/2008
From: Lone Star Nation
Status: offline 		It's all about the SLoC. If Japan can cut it, the invasion is doomed. If the Allies can maintain it, Japan is doomed.

_____________________________


(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 18
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/14/2013 4:17:25 AM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		9-11 August
Good discussion guys, thanks for that. Dan and Michael, I tip my hat to your experience and thoughts on the subject.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to Cribtop)
Post #: 19
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/14/2013 4:31:30 AM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		12-13 August
Started sweeping the Allied bases. Heavy air losses for me and each day or two I had to rotate F units. Also, as I have killed the experience levels in this mod, I have very few experienced pilots. Good Air Skill, but low experience meant that it was a killing ground for pilots. Why did I throw these units in ? It will be revealed soon...




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 20
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/14/2013 4:35:28 AM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		14 August '42




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 21
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/14/2013 4:38:27 AM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		15 August 1942




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 22
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/14/2013 4:55:06 AM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		16 August, 1942
So, the culmination of a few days sweeps, the Allies sitting in the middle of the ocean too long (Floyd said he was leaving the next turn.), so luck on my part and some great Betty's making it easier for me.





Morning Air attack on TF, near Uruppu-jima at 130,54

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 78 NM, estimated altitude 12,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 27 minutes

Japanese aircraft
G4M1 Betty x 18

Allied aircraft
F4F-4 Wildcat x 32

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 6 damaged
G4M1 Betty: 1 destroyed by flak

No Allied losses

Allied Ships
CV Enterprise, Torpedo hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage
CL Honolulu
DD Cushing

Aircraft Attacking:
15 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Type 91 Torpedo

CAP engaged:
VF-71 with F4F-4 Wildcat (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
(8 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 8 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 2 minutes
VF-3 with F4F-4 Wildcat (2 airborne, 6 on standby, 0 scrambling)
2 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 18000 , scrambling fighters between 11000 and 17000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 32 minutes
VF-6 with F4F-4 Wildcat (2 airborne, 4 on standby, 0 scrambling)
2 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 13000 , scrambling fighters between 5000 and 13000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 17 minutes
VF-8 with F4F-4 Wildcat (0 airborne, 7 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 3 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 13000 and 14000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 24 minutes

Ammo storage explosion on CV Enterprise


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Uruppu-jima at 131,53

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 37 NM, estimated altitude 16,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 13 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 18
B5N2 Kate x 12
D3A1 Val x 23

Allied aircraft
F4F-3 Wildcat x 18

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 1 destroyed
B5N2 Kate: 1 destroyed
B5N2 Kate: 1 destroyed by flak
D3A1 Val: 3 destroyed, 8 damaged
D3A1 Val: 1 destroyed by flak

No Allied losses

Allied Ships
CV Lexington, Bomb hits 2, Torpedo hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
CA Astoria
CA Portland

Aircraft Attacking:
12 x D3A1 Val releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
9 x B5N2 Kate launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Type 91 Torpedo
5 x D3A1 Val releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg SAP Bomb

CAP engaged:
VF-2 with F4F-3 Wildcat (4 airborne, 10 on standby, 0 scrambling)
4 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 14000 , scrambling fighters between 16000 and 18000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 11 minutes
VMF-211 with F4F-3 Wildcat (1 airborne, 3 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 17000 , scrambling fighters between 11000 and 14000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 9 minutes

Heavy smoke from fires obscuring CV Lexington


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Uruppu-jima at 130,54

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 79 NM, estimated altitude 16,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 29 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 79
B5N2 Kate x 40
D3A1 Val x 62

Allied aircraft
F4F-4 Wildcat x 29

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 5 destroyed
B5N2 Kate: 1 damaged
D3A1 Val: 7 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-4 Wildcat: 3 destroyed

Allied Ships
CA Chester, Bomb hits 2, on fire
CV Enterprise, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk
CL Honolulu, Bomb hits 5, on fire
CL Raleigh
CV Saratoga, Bomb hits 2, Torpedo hits 2, heavy fires
CA Chicago, Bomb hits 4, on fire, heavy damage
DD McCall
CA Northampton
CLAA San Juan, Bomb hits 1, on fire

Aircraft Attacking:
7 x D3A1 Val releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
5 x B5N2 Kate launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Type 91 Torpedo
7 x B5N2 Kate launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Type 91 Torpedo
10 x D3A1 Val releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
9 x D3A1 Val releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
10 x B5N2 Kate launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Type 91 Torpedo
5 x D3A1 Val releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
14 x B5N2 Kate launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Type 91 Torpedo
4 x B5N2 Kate bombing from 13000 feet
Naval Attack: 2 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
8 x D3A1 Val releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
1 x D3A1 Val releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
8 x D3A1 Val releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
6 x D3A1 Val releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
8 x D3A1 Val releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg SAP Bomb

CAP engaged:
VF-3 with F4F-4 Wildcat (0 airborne, 6 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 2 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 18000 , scrambling fighters between 11000 and 13000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 30 minutes
VF-6 with F4F-4 Wildcat (0 airborne, 4 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 2 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 13000 , scrambling fighters between 13000 and 14000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 22 minutes
VF-8 with F4F-4 Wildcat (0 airborne, 7 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 2 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 12000 and 15000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 29 minutes
VF-71 with F4F-4 Wildcat (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 6 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 12 minutes

Ammo storage explosion on CV Enterprise
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring CL Honolulu
Ammo storage explosion on CV Saratoga
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring CV Saratoga


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Etorofu at 127,54

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid detected at 77 NM, estimated altitude 14,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 30 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 73
E13A1 Jake x 2
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 3

Allied aircraft
F4F-3 Wildcat x 5
SBD-3 Dauntless x 57
TBF-1 Avenger x 28

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
SBD-3 Dauntless: 22 destroyed, 5 damaged
TBF-1 Avenger: 8 destroyed, 10 damaged
TBF-1 Avenger: 1 destroyed by flak

Japanese Ships
DD Asanagi
BB Kirishima
CV Zuikaku
CV Akagi
BB Nagato
CV Soryu
CV Hiyo
BB Mutsu
BB Hiei

Aircraft Attacking:
3 x SBD-3 Dauntless bombing from 8000 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
4 x SBD-3 Dauntless bombing from 7000 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
11 x TBF-1 Avenger launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22in Mk 13 Torpedo
7 x SBD-3 Dauntless bombing from 7000 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
13 x SBD-3 Dauntless bombing from 7000 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
6 x TBF-1 Avenger launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22in Mk 13 Torpedo

CAP engaged:
Kaga-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
(3 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 5 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 6 minutes
3 planes vectored on to bombers
Hiryu-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
(10 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 7 being recalled, 3 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 13000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 32 minutes
7 planes vectored on to bombers
Shokaku-1 with A6M2 Zero (8 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
(11 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.)
8 plane(s) intercepting now.
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 3 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 13000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 6 minutes
7 planes vectored on to bombers
Genzan Ku S-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 1 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 18000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 12 minutes
1 planes vectored on to bombers
1st Ku S-1/B with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 1 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 18000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 4 minutes
Akagi-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 8 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 4 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 13000 , scrambling fighters between 11000 and 13000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 36 minutes
12 planes vectored on to bombers
Soryu-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 8 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 4 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 13000 , scrambling fighters between 8000 and 11000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 19 minutes
4 planes vectored on to bombers
Zuikaku-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 8 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 3 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 13000 , scrambling fighters between 12000 and 13000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 19 minutes
11 planes vectored on to bombers
Hiyo-1 with A6M2 Zero (3 airborne, 7 on standby, 0 scrambling)
3 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 13000 , scrambling fighters between 7000 and 14000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 38 minutes
10 planes vectored on to bombers
Maya-1 with E13A1 Jake (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 1 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 6000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 17 minutes
1 planes vectored on to bombers
Maya-2 with E13A1 Jake (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 1 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 6000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 1 minutes
1 planes vectored on to bombers
244th Sentai with Ki-43-Ic Oscar (2 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
2 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 6000
Raid is overhead
2 planes vectored on to bombers
203rd Sentai with Ki-43-Ic Oscar (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 1 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 6000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 14 minutes



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Etorofu at 127,54

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid detected at 80 NM, estimated altitude 14,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 31 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 44
E13A1 Jake x 1
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 2

Allied aircraft
F4F-4 Wildcat x 6
SBD-3 Dauntless x 63
TBF-1 Avenger x 40

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-4 Wildcat: 1 destroyed
SBD-3 Dauntless: 1 destroyed, 16 damaged
SBD-3 Dauntless: 1 destroyed by flak
TBF-1 Avenger: 6 destroyed, 12 damaged
TBF-1 Avenger: 1 destroyed by flak

Japanese Ships
CV Soryu
CV Zuikaku
CV Akagi
BB Nagato
BB Hiei
BB Mutsu, Bomb hits 2, on fire
CV Hiyo
BB Kirishima

Aircraft Attacking:
14 x SBD-3 Dauntless bombing from 8000 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
8 x TBF-1 Avenger launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22in Mk 13 Torpedo
12 x SBD-3 Dauntless bombing from 8000 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
6 x SBD-3 Dauntless bombing from 7000 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
13 x SBD-3 Dauntless bombing from 8000 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
14 x SBD-3 Dauntless bombing from 7000 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
9 x TBF-1 Avenger launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22in Mk 13 Torpedo
9 x TBF-1 Avenger launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22in Mk 13 Torpedo

CAP engaged:
Hiryu-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
(9 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.)
4 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 13000 , scrambling fighters between 6000 and 7000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 64 minutes
4 planes vectored on to bombers
Shokaku-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
(5 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.)
4 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 13000 , scrambling fighters to 7000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 31 minutes
3 planes vectored on to bombers
Zuikaku-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
(1 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.)
6 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 13000 , scrambling fighters between 4000 and 7000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 14 minutes
6 planes vectored on to bombers
Genzan Ku S-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 18000 , scrambling fighters to 7000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 17 minutes
Akagi-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
11 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 13000 , scrambling fighters between 4000 and 7000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 20 minutes
11 planes vectored on to bombers
Kaga-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
2 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters to 7000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 25 minutes
1 planes vectored on to bombers
Soryu-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 4 on standby, 0 scrambling)
2 plane(s) not yet engaged, 3 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 13000 , scrambling fighters between 7000 and 8000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 18 minutes
4 planes vectored on to bombers
Hiyo-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
4 plane(s) not yet engaged, 3 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 13000 , scrambling fighters between 4000 and 7000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 18 minutes
4 planes vectored on to bombers
Maya-2 with E13A1 Jake (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 6000 , scrambling fighters to 7000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 18 minutes
244th Sentai with Ki-43-Ic Oscar (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 6000 , scrambling fighters to 7000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 21 minutes
1 planes vectored on to bombers
203rd Sentai with Ki-43-Ic Oscar (1 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 6000
Raid is overhead


Attachment (1)

< Message edited by n01487477 -- 4/14/2013 4:59:34 AM >

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 23
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/14/2013 6:05:14 AM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		17-18 August, 1942
Well this post brings us up to date.

Added some fighters to CV's to make up for losses and went hunting ...

I won't bore you with combat reports but basically on the 17th I finished off 3 Allied CV's which were damaged on the 16th, plus heavily damaged a load of CA's, CL's and DD's. I probably should have been more aggressive in my movements on the 17th and gone NE hard and fast. It is hard to place your forces in harms way sometimes and this caution was a mistake. I think that if I had, I'd have finished off the US CV's and that might have been the ballgame. I split off a BBTF and they took out the last of the transports and another SCTF, bombarded Uruppu, destroying a load of CV airgroups on the ground.

On the 18th, I went hard East to see if I could catch up to the US CV's, they've disappeared so now I'll have to do some looking and waiting. I did try to count out the possible movement and places my forces to catch them, but this just goes to show that I should have gone harder in the previous turn. I did destroy some AO's, CA's and DD's though.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by n01487477 -- 4/14/2013 6:15:11 AM >

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 24
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/14/2013 6:07:33 AM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		Summary of operations




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by n01487477 -- 4/14/2013 6:09:41 AM >

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 25
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/14/2013 4:26:27 PM   
n01487477


Posts: 4779
Joined: 2/21/2006
Status: offline 		Well the game ends with both Floyd and myself not willing to play the next year out. A rematch will be played when things settle down, I finish my new mod & maybe after a new Tracker release.

Sorry guys this was short and sweet.I'll try to do a proper AAR next time.

_____________________________

-Damian-
EconDoc
TrackerAE
Tutes&Java

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 26
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/16/2013 12:19:03 AM   
Nemo121


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

I do agree with you, but I'm not 100% convinced that in a scenario 1 game this couldn't be pulled off by a very good Allied player bringing 3x more than enough and getting a little more luck than my opponent got.


True, with 2 islands in US control this was an awesome situation from which to expand with fighter CAP covering fast raider DD TFs.


It is a pity the game ended. I thought the Allied position looked really rather good and those landings were achieved without too much loss relative to the huge gains which could be made if properly exploited. One key error here though appears to be his failure to take into account air transport range. I've maintained islands in the Kuriles before without CVs by MASSIVE use of bombers and seaplanes flying supplies in, backed up by the occasional 50 DD massed Fast Transport TFs running in with supplies.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to n01487477)
Post #: 27
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/16/2013 5:55:56 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Well done with this. Highly interesting and well played. I had hallucinations of when Dan did this in our first campaign in late-43.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 28
RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/18/2013 12:29:39 AM   
floydg

 

Posts: 2052
Joined: 6/27/2004
From: Middletown, NJ
Status: offline 		I agree with pretty much everything people have said. I was getting my butt kicked and really wanted to stage something significant. Of course, it probably wasn't the right time, but I have issues with being patient sometimes.

Here was my thinking: if he put in for the July CV refits, I had until late July to establish a beachhead. I initially wanted only one base (U-J), but decided to add a second (S-J) behind for LRCAP over U-J. I had planned a distraction operation at Carnavron and Pago Pago, but my timing was messed up due to fuel issues and Carnarvron happened too late to draw Damian's attention and Pago Pago happened after Kuriles (was supposed to be about 6 days before). Later plan was to invade back to P-J once U-J and S-J were established to keep a solid line of supply back to Alaska. I was hoping to settle in before winter hit.

It sounded good on paper, but I later realized that how I loaded the invasion TFs (not enough APs, too little supply, bad mix on TFs with planes) was not good. So I never unloaded supply or aircraft before the fleet was sunk. I had to come back with more supply and planes. I messed that up also and they didn't get to unload before they met their fiery demise. I ended up transferring in some planes from Attu, which is what I should have done in the first place. Then I had to bring in supply yet again, along with more troops (Americal Division). Damian soaked up my CAP until I had almost nothing left. I needed two more days to unload what was needed, but he struck me and sunk three CVs. I got most of the Americal unloaded, some supply, but those guys on the ground were doomed now.

After analyzing what I had left, I realized:
  • Only two CVs left until mid-'43. I could work with CVEs, but not that easy for me.
  • Lost about half of the AP/xAP I had, 20% of all I would get. I was converting xAK, but not enough.
  • Lost so many CA, CL, CLAA, DD that escorting TFs later would be difficult.

    I have no delusions that I'm a good enough player to bounce back after that.

    Ask me anything. I'm not ashamed...

    (in reply to John 3rd)
    • Post #: 29
    RE: Damian Vs. Floyd (Tracker Boys AAR) post game? - 4/18/2013 12:31:53 AM   
    floydg

     

    Posts: 2052
    Joined: 6/27/2004
    From: Middletown, NJ
    Status: offline
    quote:

    ORIGINAL: Nemo121

    quote:

    I do agree with you, but I'm not 100% convinced that in a scenario 1 game this couldn't be pulled off by a very good Allied player bringing 3x more than enough and getting a little more luck than my opponent got.


    True, with 2 islands in US control this was an awesome situation from which to expand with fighter CAP covering fast raider DD TFs.


    It is a pity the game ended. I thought the Allied position looked really rather good and those landings were achieved without too much loss relative to the huge gains which could be made if properly exploited. One key error here though appears to be his failure to take into account air transport range. I've maintained islands in the Kuriles before without CVs by MASSIVE use of bombers and seaplanes flying supplies in, backed up by the occasional 50 DD massed Fast Transport TFs running in with supplies.


    Yeah, that's what I later realized would have been the right way to go. But I never built up the Aleutians (as you'll see). The men have been separated from the boys...

    (in reply to Nemo121)
    Post #: 30
    Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
    All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> n01487477(Damian) Vs. Nemo121 Page: [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

    1.828