RE: Japanese land in OZ!!

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: Japanese land in OZ!!

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: Japanese land in OZ!!

Page: << < prev 20 21 [22] 23 24 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/7/2014 3:39:41 PM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

Here is a good example of what I�m facing. Remember the rivercrossing with the Panzer Armee 5-6 days ago. This is what the stack looks like now.

quote:

Ground combat at 81,39 (near Tienshui)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 1380 troops, 94 guns, 147 vehicles, Assault Value = 1771

Defending force 31992 troops, 285 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 850

Japanese ground losses:
Guns lost 6 (2 destroyed, 4 disabled)
Vehicles lost 10 (8 destroyed, 2 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
Guns lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled)

Assaulting units:
12th Tank Regiment
110th Division
10th Tank Regiment
9th Tank Regiment
3rd Tank Regiment
17th Division
32nd Division
15th Tank Regiment
11th Tank Regiment
4th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
Botanko Hvy Gun Regiment
22nd Medium Field Artillery Regiment
2nd Hvy.Artillery Regiment

Defending units:
56th Chinese Corps
68th Chinese Corps
75th Chinese Corps
22nd Artillery Regiment
4th Heavy Mortar Regiment
3rd Heavy Mortar Regiment
18th Artillery Regiment
Jingcha War Area
41st AA Regiment

He has almost 100k troops in the hex. SL limit is 40k. I have 38200 SL value. I can�t overstack. Not even for a minute because my supply is already in red. But he can... now add to that the armor which I am absolutely defenseless against, the constant bombing from the air which I am also defenseless against. The ground bombardments turn after turn eating up the supply and slowly causing disablements from which I will never recover.

Now add that on 3-4 more locations on the map and you get the picture of how China looks right now.

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 631

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/7/2014 4:04:01 PM

witpqs

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

Remember that once your supply is gone in the region you can over stack as you like and it will cost you nothing, because you have nothing! But it will cost him because he has supply to be taken.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 632

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/7/2014 4:11:09 PM

ny59giants

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

Severely overstacking will add extra disruption in combat.

_____________________________

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 633

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/7/2014 4:14:37 PM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Remember that once your supply is gone in the region you can over stack as you like and it will cost you nothing, because you have nothing! But it will cost him because he has supply to be taken.

Haha, yeah. There is always something optimistic to be found!

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 634

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/7/2014 4:22:38 PM

witpqs

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Severely overstacking will add extra disruption in combat.

Yes, but when one has lemons...

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to ny59giants)

Post #: 635

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/7/2014 4:26:49 PM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Severely overstacking will add extra disruption in combat.

Yes, but when one has lemons...

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 636

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/7/2014 6:09:50 PM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

6st of March!
______________________________________________________________________________

Very little to report actually.

------------------------
China
------------------------
Bombardments continue all over the map while the airforce pound away. I think the calm will last only a day or two more.

------------------------
OZ
------------------------
Finally manage to cause some damage to the KB air wings. A newly arrived heavy AA unit arrive at Sydney. Results are quite good. On the 5th we blast away the Betties flying from the North shooting down 8 of them. Results are even better on the 6th when the KB strike.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 637

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/7/2014 6:20:44 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

Ouch. After also recently experiencing the KB doing firebombing on Oz targets I have to say I question the tactic, at least with pre-war pilots. Three points of LI gone which can be repaired in three days for a dozen carrier planes is a bad trade to me. And you did better than that.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 638

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/7/2014 6:21:50 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

I've noticed that the Kates seem to be much less vulnerable to flak than Vals. I find this
strange since it is a bigger aircraft and has to fly a straight line to deliver its torpedo.
I don't think it was armoured or had self-sealing fuel tanks, so what's its secret?

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 639

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/7/2014 6:36:41 PM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

State of the Chinese military
______________________________________________________________________________

First of all, thanks Loka! Worked perfectly!

I crunched some numbers and its a interesting read...and unexpected.

I started out by comparing the AV from the last turn with the 1st turn. Here are the numbers.

------------------------
Raw AV
------------------------
Starting: 20322
Now: 20849
+527

------------------------
EXP
------------------------
Starting: 37,82805
Now: 35,50385
-2,3242

This one I can�t explain. Could be because of respawns? Or possibly because a lot of Corps are broken down into 3rds?

------------------------
Supply
------------------------
This one would have been the really interesting one. But the way the numbers are presented in Excel makes this beyond my skill. Instead of reporting only the actual number it reports both the actual number and the units max. So it looks like 981/718. No idea how to work with that.

I also wanted to check the supply in bases in China but you can only filter by region and not by nationality. And the only region for the allies is the entire map.

Pretty amazed I actually have increased the raw AV despite all the fighting. But in reality lack of supply have more then halved the strength. With Lanchow about to fall supply will shortly plummet and I will be getting a -90% AV reduction dooming the Chinese to annihilation.

< Message edited by JocMeister -- 8/7/2014 7:44:17 PM >

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 640

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/7/2014 6:43:32 PM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Ouch. After also recently experiencing the KB doing firebombing on Oz targets I have to say I question the tactic, at least with pre-war pilots. Three points of LI gone which can be repaired in three days for a dozen carrier planes is a bad trade to me. And you did better than that.

3 points? I wish!

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 641

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/7/2014 6:46:41 PM

offenseman

Posts: 768
Joined: 2/24/2007
From: Sheridan Wyoming, USA
Status: offline

I've never looked at Tracker for Allies but I suspect you can get it into regions. Try this:

In Tracker:
Go to File
Import Base Region Definitions
That will open a window. In that window, double click on regions-mappings.
Select the one you wish to use. If you choose a multiple part file, you will have to rinse and repeat until they are all done. Like Nomad files for example

_____________________________

Sometimes things said in Nitwit sound very different in English.

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 642

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/7/2014 7:05:56 PM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: offenseman

I've never looked at Tracker for Allies but I suspect you can get it into regions. Try this:

In Tracker:
Go to File
Import Base Region Definitions
That will open a window. In that window, double click on regions-mappings.
Select the one you wish to use. If you choose a multiple part file, you will have to rinse and repeat until they are all done. Like Nomad files for example

Thats awesome! Completely missed that. Thank you!

I�ll get going on the supply situation tomorrow.

(in reply to offenseman)

Post #: 643

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/7/2014 7:42:22 PM

Lokasenna

Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

quote:

ORIGINAL: offenseman

I've never looked at Tracker for Allies but I suspect you can get it into regions. Try this:

In Tracker:
Go to File
Import Base Region Definitions
That will open a window. In that window, double click on regions-mappings.
Select the one you wish to use. If you choose a multiple part file, you will have to rinse and repeat until they are all done. Like Nomad files for example

Thats awesome! Completely missed that. Thank you! I�ll get going on the supply situation tomorrow.

I use Kull's definitions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

I've noticed that the Kates seem to be much less vulnerable to flak than Vals. I find this
strange since it is a bigger aircraft and has to fly a straight line to deliver its torpedo.
I don't think it was armoured or had self-sealing fuel tanks, so what's its secret?

Dive bombers suffer more from flak, I think. They'll drop their bomb and get chewed up by the AA at 2000 or 4000 where they release, whereas the Kates will be flying straight and level, sure - but they'll be doing it at 9000 feet. Everything can shoot at the diving Vals, but the devices have to be able to reach 9000 to hit the Kates.

It's why I've been bombing from 16,000 against Bullwinkle... It's also why my results aren't as good, but on the other hand I haven't lost diddly to flak, so... yeah. If it were earlier in the war, I'd be doing what MrKane is doing. I would gladly trade even 1/3 of KB's prewar pilots for 3000 permanent VPs.

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 644

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/7/2014 8:24:00 PM

ny59giants

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

Can you safely get one and later the second big NZ AA brigades over to Australia?? That will take some starch out of his attacks.

EDIT: Sorry, the first doesn't come in until May 1st. Oops!!

< Message edited by ny59giants -- 8/7/2014 9:30:09 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 645

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/7/2014 8:45:06 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Here is a good example of what I�m facing. Remember the rivercrossing with the Panzer Armee 5-6 days ago. This is what the stack looks like now.

quote:

Japanese ground losses:
Guns lost 6 (2 destroyed, 4 disabled)
Vehicles lost 10 (8 destroyed, 2 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
Guns lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled)

Huh? This looks pretty good to me! I wish my counter bombardments looked like that!

It looks like he has about 60-70k for stacking purposes here, still quite far over, and I wonder if that is what is causing the interesting results fro bombardments. I've never seen the Chinese get a positive against Japanese heavy arty. I think you should stick tight and see what happens. Not that you have a choice, but if he is overstacked the next DA could be a bad day for the IJA based on this result.

< Message edited by obvert -- 8/7/2014 11:06:00 PM >

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 646

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/7/2014 8:49:16 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

Dive bombers suffer more from flak, I think. They'll drop their bomb and get chewed up by the AA at 2000 or 4000 where they release, whereas the Kates will be flying straight and level, sure - but they'll be doing it at 9000 feet. Everything can shoot at the diving Vals, but the devices have to be able to reach 9000 to hit the Kates.

It's why I've been bombing from 16,000 against Bullwinkle... It's also why my results aren't as good, but on the other hand I haven't lost diddly to flak, so... yeah. If it were earlier in the war, I'd be doing what MrKane is doing. I would gladly trade even 1/3 of KB's prewar pilots for 3000 permanent VPs.

At 9k the DBs will go in as level bombers too, between 6-9k. Used to glide, but not anymore. I've used this a lot in port strikes. I think the Kates are more durable than the Vals.

< Message edited by obvert -- 8/7/2014 9:49:57 PM >

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 647

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/7/2014 9:37:49 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

Dive bombers suffer more from flak, I think. They'll drop their bomb and get chewed up by the AA at 2000 or 4000 where they release, whereas the Kates will be flying straight and level, sure - but they'll be doing it at 9000 feet. Everything can shoot at the diving Vals, but the devices have to be able to reach 9000 to hit the Kates.

It's why I've been bombing from 16,000 against Bullwinkle... It's also why my results aren't as good, but on the other hand I haven't lost diddly to flak, so... yeah. If it were earlier in the war, I'd be doing what MrKane is doing. I would gladly trade even 1/3 of KB's prewar pilots for 3000 permanent VPs.

At 9k the DBs will go in as level bombers too, between 6-9k. Used to glide, but not anymore. I've used this a lot in port strikes. I think the Kates are more durable than the Vals.

More durable - yeah, but not sure they should be. My reference to them being easy targets goes to observations during their torpedo attacks on ships, when Vals are also in the attack.
The Vals always suffer more flak losses and damage while the Kate motors along with usually only one or two damaged. Like a one-engine B-17, but not realistic IMO.
Another game-play balancing skew I suppose.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 648

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/7/2014 10:27:22 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

Dive bombers suffer more from flak, I think. They'll drop their bomb and get chewed up by the AA at 2000 or 4000 where they release, whereas the Kates will be flying straight and level, sure - but they'll be doing it at 9000 feet. Everything can shoot at the diving Vals, but the devices have to be able to reach 9000 to hit the Kates.

It's why I've been bombing from 16,000 against Bullwinkle... It's also why my results aren't as good, but on the other hand I haven't lost diddly to flak, so... yeah. If it were earlier in the war, I'd be doing what MrKane is doing. I would gladly trade even 1/3 of KB's prewar pilots for 3000 permanent VPs.

At 9k the DBs will go in as level bombers too, between 6-9k. Used to glide, but not anymore. I've used this a lot in port strikes. I think the Kates are more durable than the Vals.

More durable - yeah, but not sure they should be. My reference to them being easy targets goes to observations during their torpedo attacks on ships, when Vals are also in the attack.
The Vals always suffer more flak losses and damage while the Kate motors along with usually only one or two damaged. Like a one-engine B-17, but not realistic IMO.
Another game-play balancing skew I suppose.

Actually, I just checked. The Val is durability 28, the Kate 26. So it's probably just the mission type, settings, or even pilot quality.

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 649

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/7/2014 10:54:41 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

You've only sunk 14 Japanese ships?

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 650

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/7/2014 11:14:12 PM

Lokasenna

Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

You've only sunk 14 Japanese ships?

Ouch. With FOW, this could be off, but....usually it's off in the direction of too many on the list.

Usually the CD guns at Ambon and such places will take care of at least a couple of xAKs - has he not invaded those places yet?

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 651

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/8/2014 3:10:25 PM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

You've only sunk 14 Japanese ships?

Ouch. With FOW, this could be off, but....usually it's off in the direction of too many on the list.

Usually the CD guns at Ambon and such places will take care of at least a couple of xAKs - has he not invaded those places yet?

Its probably only 8-10 or so.

Yes Ambon is invaded and he probably lost a xAK there if I�m lucky. I�m still getting 1-3 sub attacks each turn but have only sunk a tanker. Nothing more. Rest is sunk by mines and collisions.

I hope to change this in the coming months but it doesn�t look good. Having KB in the DEI early on eliminated any chances to hit anything. After that he has only expanded under KB cover. He still have loads and loads of bases to capture but he can now do that in peace and quiet a month after the last allied ships and air planes pulled out. I can still pull the trigger on Java once more but I lack targets. For now I�m prioritizing escort duty for TFs moving to SOPAC/OZ and don�t have many combat ships to spare for something fun.

That being said I have some things going on I havn�t mentioned here...yet.

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 652

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/8/2014 6:13:06 PM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

9th of March -42
______________________________________________________________________________

Some significant event happens on the 9th.

------------------------
Philippines
------------------------
Clark field finally succumbs to the Japanese attackers. All better combat formations had evacuated Manila prior to this attack.

quote:

Ground combat at Clark Field (79,76)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 36359 troops, 649 guns, 711 vehicles, Assault Value = 1023

Defending force 19095 troops, 262 guns, 60 vehicles, Assault Value = 317

Japanese adjusted assault: 1507

Allied adjusted defense: 307

Japanese assault odds: 4 to 1 (fort level 0)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Clark Field !!!

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), disruption(-), preparation(-), experience(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
1008 casualties reported
Squads: 9 destroyed, 97 disabled
Non Combat: 8 destroyed, 33 disabled
Engineers: 9 destroyed, 36 disabled
Vehicles lost 23 (2 destroyed, 21 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
9641 casualties reported
Squads: 253 destroyed, 34 disabled
Non Combat: 232 destroyed, 39 disabled
Engineers: 100 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 153 (147 destroyed, 6 disabled)
Vehicles lost 37 (35 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Units retreated 11
Units destroyed 1

Defeated Allied Units Retreating!

Assaulting units:
16th Division
3rd Ind Engineer Regiment
48th Division
4th Tank Regiment
21st Ind Engineer Regiment
2nd Tank Regiment
7th Tank Regiment
15th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
8th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
1st Hvy.Artillery Regiment
14th Army
10th Ind. Mountain Gun Regiment
9th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
1st Medium Field Artillery Regiment
2nd Mortar Battalion
3rd Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
20th Ind. Mtn Gun Battalion
2nd Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
2nd Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion

Defending units:
45th PS Infantry Regimental Combat Team
31st PA Infantry Division
21st PA Infantry Division
11th PA Infantry Division
51st PA Infantry Division
26th PS Cavalry Regiment
Far East USAAF
Clark Field AAF Base Force
202nd PA Construction Battalion
301st Construction Battalion
201st PA Construction Battalion
301st PA Field Artillery Regiment

------------------------
Burma
------------------------
An empty Rangoon is captured by the empire. This causes a significant dip in allied VPs.

------------------------
KB
------------------------
After replenishing at Brisbane the KB disappears outside allied search. Either due East or somewhere to the North. I wonder if its time for another Japanese major landing? Allied shipping is placed on high alert...

------------------------
China
------------------------
The first allied offensive sweeps hit Japanese LRCAP south of Ankang. Results are good with 7 Zeroes and 5 Nates shot down for only two H81-A3s.

Another Japanese deliberate attack on the roadblock to Ankang. Its another 1-2 but I�m slowly being worn down. I have no troops close enough to reinforce in time. Two more attacks and he will break through.

quote:

Ground combat at 83,44 (near Ankang)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 36847 troops, 665 guns, 8 vehicles, Assault Value = 764

Defending force 30521 troops, 176 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 693

Japanese adjusted assault: 575

Allied adjusted defense: 1270

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
1357 casualties reported
Squads: 13 destroyed, 137 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 7 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 8 disabled

Allied ground losses:
550 casualties reported
Squads: 7 destroyed, 47 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 10 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 4 (1 destroyed, 3 disabled)

Assaulting units:
13th Division
40th Division
14th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
11th Army
51st Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion
15th Ind.Medium Field Artillery Regiment
1st Mortar Battalion
2nd Ind. Mountain Gun Regiment
52nd Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion

Defending units:
92nd Chinese Corps
94th Chinese Corps
95th Chinese Corps
26th Group Army
5th War Area
33rd Group Army

Don�t remember if I mentioned it but Lanchow fell as expected a couple of days back. I�m trying to evacuate troops south that had defended the road. I think I can get them out.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 653

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/8/2014 7:18:27 PM

Sangeli

Posts: 1132
Joined: 3/29/2012
From: San Francisco
Status: offline

Sian is going to fall. If you pull back from the Ankang road and and the Sian region you should have enough to stop him in the 3x terrain somewhere along the dirt road towards Kienko. Just don't let him bypass you by moving slowly around your flanks. Also be sure to occupy the end of that dirt road that leads from Chungking to Ankang but doesn't get all the way there. There are only 3 avenues attack he can take and 2 of them have road gaps and all are in 3x terrain so this is about as an ideal of a defensive situation as you can get (although the strategic situation is admittedly not great). As I said previously I'd be surprised if you don't salvage the situation in the north insofar as you immediately start moving towards those new strong defensive positions.

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 654

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/9/2014 8:24:13 AM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sangeli

Sian is going to fall. If you pull back from the Ankang road and and the Sian region you should have enough to stop him in the 3x terrain somewhere along the dirt road towards Kienko. Just don't let him bypass you by moving slowly around your flanks. Also be sure to occupy the end of that dirt road that leads from Chungking to Ankang but doesn't get all the way there. There are only 3 avenues attack he can take and 2 of them have road gaps and all are in 3x terrain so this is about as an ideal of a defensive situation as you can get (although the strategic situation is admittedly not great). As I said previously I'd be surprised if you don't salvage the situation in the north insofar as you immediately start moving towards those new strong defensive positions.

I�m already digging in at the southern approaches. But admittedly I�m more pessimistic about the situation then you are.

Hopefully you are right and I can stop him. Not looking good right now though.

------------------------
China
------------------------
I can�t remember who it was but someone suggested Sian should be defended in strength earlier. Here is why doing that is a very bad idea and shouldn�t be attempted

Level 4 forts.

quote:

Ground combat at Sian (83,41)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 3477 troops, 227 guns, 414 vehicles, Assault Value = 1075

Defending force 85485 troops, 511 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1529

Allied ground losses:
1099 casualties reported
Squads: 51 destroyed, 58 disabled
Non Combat: 3 destroyed, 6 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 4 disabled
Guns lost 13 (3 destroyed, 10 disabled)

Assaulting units:
116th Division
6th Division
35th Division
8th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
9th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
15th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
China Expeditionary Army
North China Area Army
5th Ind.Hvy.Art Battalion
5th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
1st Field Artillery Regiment
20th Medium Field Artillery Regiment

Defending units:
90th Chinese Corps
27th Chinese Corps
12th Chinese Corps
77th Chinese Corps
47th Chinese Corps
84th Chinese Corps
8th Route Army
55th Chinese Corps
80th Chinese Corps
42nd Chinese Corps
96th Chinese Corps
3rd Chinese Corps
93rd Chinese Corps
40th Chinese Corps
2nd Chinese Cavalry Corps
Red Chinese Army
31st Group Army
14th Group Army
3rd Group Army
1st War Area
7th Group Army
15th Chinese Base Force

Then add another 1500 casualties PER turn from the air. That is why I abandoned Sian.

The roadblock at the rivercrossing (where the Panzer Armee crossed) is crumbling faster then I would have liked.

quote:

Ground combat at 81,39 (near Tienshui)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 5944 troops, 423 guns, 527 vehicles, Assault Value = 1095

Defending force 30933 troops, 281 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 720

Japanese ground losses:
Vehicles lost 5 (2 destroyed, 3 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
271 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 17 disabled
Non Combat: 7 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Assaulting units:
12th Tank Regiment
17th Division
110th Division
22nd Medium Field Artillery Regiment
Botanko Hvy Gun Regiment
8th Mountain Gun Regiment
4th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
2nd Hvy.Artillery Regiment
3rd Hvy.Artillery Regiment
6th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
10th Medium Field Artillery Regiment

Defending units:
56th Chinese Corps
68th Chinese Corps
75th Chinese Corps
Jingcha War Area
3rd Heavy Mortar Regiment
22nd Artillery Regiment
4th Heavy Mortar Regiment
18th Artillery Regiment
41st AA Regiment

Disruption is approaching dangerous levels. I�m trying to reinforce but I don�t know if I�ll make it in time.

(in reply to Sangeli)

Post #: 655

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/9/2014 8:35:11 AM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

SOPAC
______________________________________________________________________________

After disappearing from Brisbane on the 9th KB appears at Noumea on the 10th. This indicates a move towards my shipping around Pago Pago or an invasion at Suva/Nadi.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 656

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/9/2014 8:41:48 AM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

Allied buildup
______________________________________________________________________________

On the 10th a a big convoy lands at a secret location in Australia. The convoy is covered by 2 CVs and 4 BBs bringing in much needed troops, supply and planes.

Its the first of 3 big convoys due to arrive within 60 days. This first one carries:
- 6th OZ ID.
- 4 AA units
- A full medium US BG.
- A full US FG.
- 32 British Hurricanes.

I hope in about two months time to counter attack the Japanese with 3 US and 3 OZ IDs. Tom will have to decide on whether to fight or bug out.

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 657

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/9/2014 10:51:50 AM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

13th of March -42
______________________________________________________________________________

Moving forward with lightning speed!

------------------------
Philippines
------------------------
The last remaining fighters sortie for the last time. They will have to put their planes to the torch after this raid as supply will have to be conserved. They put up a good fight shooting down 30 Japanese planes for 1 own loss.

------------------------
Burma
------------------------
Tom shows his cards here at Port Blair. Good thing as I had a 2 CA TF on its way. Turning them around!

quote:

Night Naval bombardment of Port Blair at 46,58

Japanese Ships
CA Kumano
CA Suzuya
CA Mikuma
CA Mogami
DD Kasumi
DD Arare
DD Asagumo
DD Minegumo
DD Tanikaze
DD Hagikaze

Allied ground losses:
70 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 12 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 4 (2 destroyed, 2 disabled)

------------------------
KB
------------------------
Still off the radar. Getting loads of radio traffic from Rabaul. Is he coming?

Attachment (1)

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 658

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/9/2014 1:04:35 PM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

14th of March -42
______________________________________________________________________________

Some worrying developments in China...as usual!

------------------------
China
------------------------
Somehow my recon managed to miss that Toms 3 unit stack not only started moving towards the West but I didn�t find out until they actually shifted hex. Ouch. This could turn out nasty if he gets shifts to the last wooden hex before the plains before me. See map for details.

A small success again on the road to Ankang.

quote:

Ground combat at 83,44 (near Ankang)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 37184 troops, 664 guns, 8 vehicles, Assault Value = 809

Defending force 30121 troops, 175 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 651

Japanese adjusted assault: 361

Allied adjusted defense: 1729

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 4

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
2323 casualties reported
Squads: 8 destroyed, 163 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 36 disabled
Engineers: 4 destroyed, 15 disabled

Allied ground losses:
286 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 31 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 11 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

We manage to hold on for another attack at the river crossing.

quote:

Ground combat at 81,39 (near Tienshui)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 44219 troops, 727 guns, 763 vehicles, Assault Value = 1108

Defending force 30696 troops, 280 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 703

Japanese adjusted assault: 698

Allied adjusted defense: 1564

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
949 casualties reported
Squads: 14 destroyed, 45 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 15 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 11 disabled
Guns lost 6 (1 destroyed, 5 disabled)
Vehicles lost 36 (6 destroyed, 30 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
492 casualties reported
Squads: 12 destroyed, 93 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 13 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled
Guns lost 38 (4 destroyed, 34 disabled)

Assaulting units:
12th Tank Regiment
17th Division
110th Division
8th Mountain Gun Regiment
4th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
22nd Medium Field Artillery Regiment
Botanko Hvy Gun Regiment
2nd Hvy.Artillery Regiment
6th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
3rd Hvy.Artillery Regiment
10th Medium Field Artillery Regiment

Defending units:
68th Chinese Corps
56th Chinese Corps
75th Chinese Corps
4th Heavy Mortar Regiment
18th Artillery Regiment
22nd Artillery Regiment
Jingcha War Area
3rd Heavy Mortar Regiment
41st AA Regiment

I feel a little bit more hopeful that I can get reinforcements in. Only 2 days away. Now I only need to avoid outflanking in the south...

Attachment (1)

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 659

RE: Japanese land in OZ!! - 8/9/2014 1:11:02 PM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

SOPAC and musings
______________________________________________________________________________

I wonder what Tom is up to. He REALLY doesn�t want me to have NavS over Noumea. He even turned off the Strategic LBA to turn them loose on Norfolk Island. Why does he place such big importance on this?

I�m guessing the CA TF have troops on board and will land tomorrow. Why?

And why hasn�t he landed on Suva/Nadi? Why hasn�t he landed on Pago Pago? Why hasn�t anything landed in the Gilberts? Why is he keeping the KB deep, deep in SOPAC all the time?

I�m definitively missing something big.