My greatest USN surface victory

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

My greatest USN surface victory

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 >> My greatest USN surface victory

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

My greatest USN surface victory - 3/9/2016 11:36:13 PM

Fallschirmjager

Posts: 6793
Joined: 3/18/2002
From: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Status: offline

This a ongoing PBEM game. I composed a TF and gave them a bombardment mission against Port Moresby that I had lost a few weeks earlier. I have played turtle almost all game and decided I needed to be a little bit offensive.
I never expected these kinds of results.

Night Time Surface Combat, near Port Moresby at 97,131, Range 4,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
xAKL Choyo Maru #2, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
AKL Hokuhi Maru, Shell hits 5, and is sunk
AKL Indus Maru, Shell hits 13, and is sunk
AKL Sunten Maru, Shell hits 4, and is sunk
AKL Taganoura Maru, Shell hits 13, and is sunk
AKL Tihuku Maru, Shell hits 4, and is sunk
AKL Buyo Maru, Shell hits 4, heavy fires
AKL Heiku Maru, Shell hits 11, and is sunk
AKL Kashi Maru, Shell hits 13, and is sunk
AKL Kamishima Maru, Shell hits 13, and is sunk
AKL Keizan Maru, Shell hits 9, and is sunk
AKL Kensho Maru, Shell hits 11, and is sunk
AKL Kasui Maru, Shell hits 6, and is sunk
AKL Kaishi Maru, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
AKL Taiyo Maru, Shell hits 3, and is sunk
AKL Suez Maru, Shell hits 12, and is sunk
AKL Matsutan Maru, Shell hits 5, and is sunk
xAK Taijima Maru, Shell hits 14, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
xAK Alaska Maru, Shell hits 4, and is sunk

Allied Ships
BB Colorado
BB Idaho
BB New Mexico
BB Mississippi
CA Houston
CA Louisville
CA Australia
CA Canberra
CL Leander
CL Achilles
DD Mustin
DD Russell
DD O'Brien
DD Walke
DD Morris
DD Stuart

Japanese ground losses:
22775 casualties reported
Squads: 184 destroyed, 1081 disabled
Non Combat: 266 destroyed, 1032 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 117 (92 destroyed, 25 disabled)

Poor visibility due to Rain with 39% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Rain and 39% moonlight: 3,000 yards
Range closes to 21,000 yards...
CONTACT: Allies radar detects Japanese task force at 21,000 yards
Range closes to 16,000 yards...
CONTACT: Allies radar detects Japanese task force at 16,000 yards
Range closes to 11,000 yards...
Range closes to 8,000 yards...
Range closes to 6,000 yards...
Range closes to 4,000 yards...
CONTACT: Allies radar detects Japanese task force at 4,000 yards
Allies open fire on surprised Japanese ships at 4,000 yards
BB Mississippi fires at AKL Kamishima Maru at 4,000 yards
BB Mississippi fires at AKL Suez Maru at 4,000 yards
xAK Alaska Maru sunk by BB Idaho at 4,000 yards
AKL Kaishi Maru sunk by BB Mississippi at 4,000 yards
CA Canberra launches Torpedoes at AKL Kasui Maru at 4,000 yards
BB Idaho fires at AKL Kensho Maru at 4,000 yards
Massive explosion on AKL Keizan Maru
CA Canberra launches Torpedoes at AKL Keizan Maru at 4,000 yards
CA Canberra launches Torpedoes at AKL Taganoura Maru at 4,000 yards
DD Mustin launches Torpedoes at AKL Hokuhi Maru at 4,000 yards
Range closes to 2,000 yards
AKL Suez Maru sunk by BB Mississippi at 2,000 yards
AKL Keizan Maru sunk by BB New Mexico at 2,000 yards
CA Canberra engages AKL Kensho Maru at 2,000 yards
CA Australia engages AKL Taganoura Maru at 2,000 yards
BB New Mexico engages AKL Kamishima Maru at 2,000 yards
BB Idaho engages AKL Heiku Maru at 2,000 yards
DD Stuart engages AKL Tihuku Maru at 2,000 yards
DD Walke engages AKL Sunten Maru at 2,000 yards
DD Russell engages AKL Heiku Maru at 2,000 yards
DD Mustin engages AKL Taganoura Maru at 2,000 yards
Range increases to 3,000 yards
BB Mississippi engages AKL Heiku Maru at 3,000 yards
BB New Mexico engages AKL Taiyo Maru at 3,000 yards
AKL Kasui Maru sunk by BB Mississippi at 3,000 yards
AKL Heiku Maru sunk by BB New Mexico at 3,000 yards
DD Walke engages AKL Hokuhi Maru at 3,000 yards
DD Russell engages xAK Taijima Maru at 3,000 yards
Range closes to 2,000 yards
BB Mississippi engages AKL Sunten Maru at 2,000 yards
AKL Sunten Maru sunk by BB New Mexico at 2,000 yards
AKL Taganoura Maru sunk by BB Idaho at 2,000 yards
BB Mississippi engages AKL Kamishima Maru at 2,000 yards
AKL Kashi Maru sunk by BB New Mexico at 2,000 yards
CA Australia engages xAK Taijima Maru at 2,000 yards
BB Mississippi engages AKL Indus Maru at 2,000 yards
AKL Hokuhi Maru sunk by BB New Mexico at 2,000 yards
DD Russell engages xAK Taijima Maru at 2,000 yards
DD Walke engages xAK Taijima Maru at 2,000 yards
AKL Indus Maru sunk by BB New Mexico at 2,000 yards
xAK Taijima Maru sunk by DD Stuart at 2,000 yards
AKL Tihuku Maru sunk by BB Mississippi at 2,000 yards
AKL Kensho Maru sunk by BB New Mexico at 2,000 yards
BB Idaho engages AKL Buyo Maru at 2,000 yards
xAKL Choyo Maru #2 sunk by DD Stuart at 2,000 yards
Range increases to 3,000 yards
BB Mississippi engages AKL Buyo Maru at 3,000 yards
DD Russell engages AKL Matsutan Maru at 3,000 yards
Range increases to 5,000 yards
BB Mississippi engages AKL Matsutan Maru at 5,000 yards
AKL Matsutan Maru sunk by BB New Mexico at 5,000 yards
Range increases to 7,000 yards
BB Mississippi engages AKL Buyo Maru at 7,000 yards
CL Leander engages AKL Buyo Maru at 7,000 yards
Range increases to 10,000 yards
BB Idaho engages AKL Buyo Maru at 10,000 yards
Japanese Task Force Manages to Escape
Task forces break off...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Port Moresby at 98,130, Range 5,000 Yards

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Japanese aircraft losses
F1M2 Pete: 5 destroyed

Japanese Ships
BB Musashi, Shell hits 26, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
CL Kashima, Shell hits 1
CL Tama, Shell hits 2
DD Hamakaze
DD Matsukaze, Shell hits 1, on fire
DD Hatakaze

Allied Ships
BB Colorado, Shell hits 1
BB Idaho, Shell hits 3
BB New Mexico
BB Mississippi, Shell hits 13, heavy fires, heavy damage
CA Houston
CA Louisville
CA Australia, Shell hits 1
CA Canberra, Shell hits 1
CL Leander, Shell hits 1
CL Achilles, Shell hits 2
DD Mustin
DD Russell
DD O'Brien, Shell hits 1
DD Walke, Shell hits 1
DD Morris, Shell hits 1
DD Stuart

Reduced visibility due to Rain with 39% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Rain and 39% moonlight: 6,000 yards
Range closes to 20,000 yards...
Range closes to 14,000 yards...
Range closes to 8,000 yards...
CONTACT: Allies radar detects Japanese task force at 8,000 yards
Range closes to 5,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 5,000 yards
CONTACT: Allied lookouts spot Japanese task force at 5,000 yards
BB Musashi engages BB Mississippi at 5,000 yards
BB Mississippi engages CL Tama at 5,000 yards
BB Musashi engages BB Idaho at 5,000 yards
BB Mississippi engages DD Hatakaze at 5,000 yards
BB Mississippi engages DD Matsukaze at 5,000 yards
CA Australia engages DD Hamakaze at 5,000 yards
CL Achilles engages BB Musashi at 5,000 yards
BB Musashi engages CL Leander at 5,000 yards
DD Hatakaze engages DD Morris at 5,000 yards
DD Matsukaze engages DD Walke at 5,000 yards
DD O'Brien engages DD Hatakaze at 5,000 yards
DD Russell engages DD Matsukaze at 5,000 yards
DD Matsukaze engages DD Mustin at 5,000 yards
Arima, Kaoru orders Japanese TF to disengage
Range closes to 2,000 yards
Massive explosion on BB Mississippi
BB Mississippi engages BB Musashi at 2,000 yards
BB Idaho engages CL Tama at 2,000 yards
DD Hatakaze engages DD O'Brien at 2,000 yards
BB Musashi engages CA Canberra at 2,000 yards
DD Hamakaze engages DD O'Brien at 2,000 yards
BB Musashi engages CL Achilles at 2,000 yards
DD Hatakaze engages DD Morris at 2,000 yards
DD Hatakaze engages DD Walke at 2,000 yards
DD Matsukaze engages DD Russell at 2,000 yards
Range increases to 4,000 yards
BB Musashi engages BB Mississippi at 4,000 yards
CL Leander engages CL Tama at 4,000 yards
BB Mississippi engages CL Kashima at 4,000 yards
CA Canberra engages BB Musashi at 4,000 yards
DD Walke engages DD Hamakaze at 4,000 yards
DD Matsukaze engages DD Mustin at 4,000 yards
Arima, Kaoru orders Japanese TF to disengage
Range closes to 3,000 yards
BB Musashi engages BB Mississippi at 3,000 yards
BB Musashi engages BB New Mexico at 3,000 yards
CA Australia engages CL Kashima at 3,000 yards
BB Musashi engages BB Colorado at 3,000 yards
BB Mississippi engages DD Matsukaze at 3,000 yards
CA Australia engages BB Musashi at 3,000 yards
Range increases to 8,000 yards
BB Mississippi engages BB Musashi at 8,000 yards
BB New Mexico engages BB Musashi at 8,000 yards
BB Idaho engages BB Musashi at 8,000 yards
BB Musashi sunk by BB Colorado at 8,000 yards
DD Russell engages DD Matsukaze at 8,000 yards
DD Hamakaze engages DD Morris at 8,000 yards
Task forces break off...

So a force of old battleships and modern cruisers and destroyers crushes a transport TF that looks like it was carrying a division or so worth of IJN troops.
It then runs into a surface TF that has a super battleship in it.
At night
A sinks the super battleship!

And for all of it's armor, the Mushashi could not handle 14" shells
The game log says it was sunk by a 16" shell
But it was the USS Mississippi that did a huge amount of the damage. And paid for it. I am sorry to lose her. But I will trade it for the super battleship.

For early April 1942 this is a huge victory. Now to just get them all home safely before the IJN torpedo bombers come after them.
And the Mississippi was carrying the TF commander who died in the battle.
If this was real life he would instantly the awarded the Medal of Honor.

_____________________________

Post #: 1

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/10/2016 1:00:18 AM

btd64

Posts: 9973
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in Lancaster, OHIO
Status: offline

Your combat report says Colorado sunk Musashi. Still good job....GP

_____________________________

Intel i7 4.3GHz 10th Gen,16GB Ram,Nvidia GeForce MX330

AKA General Patton

WPO,WITP,WITPAE-Mod Designer/Tester
DWU-Beta Tester
TOAW4-Alpha/Beta Tester

"Do everything you ask of those you command"....Gen. George S. Patton

(in reply to Fallschirmjager)

Post #: 2

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/10/2016 1:08:52 AM

Odin

Posts: 1052
Joined: 1/3/2001
From: Germany, Wanne-Eickel
Status: offline

Good Job!

That hurts...

_____________________________

(in reply to btd64)

Post #: 3

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/10/2016 1:52:27 AM

Lokasenna

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

Early April? Musashi doesn't normally arrive until May. That means it was accelerated, unless you are playing a mod.

The numbers make me think that was more than a division of troops, but the ship types say less.

(in reply to Odin)

Post #: 4

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/10/2016 1:59:06 AM

Fallschirmjager

Posts: 6793
Joined: 3/18/2002
From: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

Early April? Musashi doesn't normally arrive until May. That means it was accelerated, unless you are playing a mod.

The numbers make me think that was more than a division of troops, but the ship types say less.

We are playing Allied Ironman. My opponent is a more novice opponent than me so we choose that scenario as we want it to go to 1946. To balance things out we turned unit withdraws off so what comes on the map, I get to keep.

As for the number of troops, I have no idea what the real number is. I sunk all AKLs which I did not even know could hold troops. So I have no idea. Fog of war is always really off when it comes to take.
But Japanese bodies should be washing up on the southern shores of New Guinea for the next several weeks.

_____________________________

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 5

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/10/2016 2:01:36 AM

Fallschirmjager

Posts: 6793
Joined: 3/18/2002
From: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: General Patton

Your combat report says Colorado sunk Musashi. Still good job....GP

Colorado got the final hit, but Mississippi did a vast majority of the damage. It got 12+ 14 inch shell hits.
The 21" British torpedo from the RAN also contributed greatly to the sinking.
IIRC I think the Colorado only hit the Musashi twice.
Mississippi gave and received the majority of the damage. I hated to lose her :(

< Message edited by Fallschirmjager -- 3/10/2016 2:05:38 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to btd64)

Post #: 6

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/10/2016 2:35:38 AM

btd64

Posts: 9973
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in Lancaster, OHIO
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Odin

Good Job!

That hurts...

I'm guessing that you're the Japanese player.

....GP

_____________________________

(in reply to Odin)

Post #: 7

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/10/2016 4:29:09 AM

wdolson

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline

It looks like you may have caught them loading the troops that took Port Morseby. Losing a division and a super battleship like that must hurt and embarrassing to be lost to WW I vintage BBs. If I was the Japanese player I wouldn't be throwing such expensive assets within range of Allied air. US medium and heavy bombers probably wouldn't have sunk her from Northern Australia, but they could have put her in the yard for a long time and there would always be the risk for the US to show up with some carriers and really make a mess of her.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to btd64)

Post #: 8

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/10/2016 2:21:59 PM

Fallschirmjager

Posts: 6793
Joined: 3/18/2002
From: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

It looks like you may have caught them loading the troops that took Port Morseby. Losing a division and a super battleship like that must hurt and embarrassing to be lost to WW I vintage BBs. If I was the Japanese player I wouldn't be throwing such expensive assets within range of Allied air. US medium and heavy bombers probably wouldn't have sunk her from Northern Australia, but they could have put her in the yard for a long time and there would always be the risk for the US to show up with some carriers and really make a mess of her.

Bill

My carriers have been swinging anchor in San Diego since the second week of December training their air crews and upgrading their air groups (some still have Buffalos and bi plane devastators)
And Australia is laughably undefended. I got the Americal division to Noumea in the past week and 2/3 of the 2nd Marine division is a few days from landing at Suva.
I have also no airpower to speak of in the Southwest Pacific.
Our game is on April 9th 1942 and so I am still weak and next probably another 60 turns to build strength.
And what my opponent does not know is this TF when it reaches Sydney will be stuck there for a while.
Australia has zero fuel and it will be some weeks before I can organize another fuel convoy that can reach them.
Tanker capacity is one of the biggest hurdles the Allies have to overcome.

I don't think my opponent did anything very wrong. He was just very unlucky and I got super lucky.
He had nothing to fear from air attack and had a sufficient force to protect that convoy. It just so happened that I had a powerful TF in the area and decided to bombard the area.
And this early in the war the fact that I won a night time surface engagement is pure luck.
At that close of range not a single IJN torpedo found it's target.

What amazes me the most is that for all of it's armor and durability. The 14" guns on those old battleships sliced right through the belt armor and inflicted terrible damage.
The 8" guns of my heavy cruisers could not hurt the belt armor but they got many superstructure hits and damaged weapons and started fires.

And that 21" torpedo from the Australian DD also did a lot of of damage. She might of not sunk if not for that flotation damage.

All in all, I got extremely lucky.
My opponent I don't think did anything wrong. It very easily could have gone against me. If any of the dozens of torpedo's that were fired had found their marks I would of had several cripples and been subject to IJN torpedo bombers on my way south back to Sydney.

< Message edited by Fallschirmjager -- 3/10/2016 2:28:41 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to wdolson)

Post #: 9

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/10/2016 2:27:55 PM

Fallschirmjager

Posts: 6793
Joined: 3/18/2002
From: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

It looks like you may have caught them loading the troops that took Port Morseby. Losing a division and a super battleship like that must hurt and embarrassing to be lost to WW I vintage BBs. If I was the Japanese player I wouldn't be throwing such expensive assets within range of Allied air. US medium and heavy bombers probably wouldn't have sunk her from Northern Australia, but they could have put her in the yard for a long time and there would always be the risk for the US to show up with some carriers and really make a mess of her.

Bill

How accurate are the numbers of troops lost when you sink a transport ship like that?

I have always wondered. I am trying to keep up with the number of potential IJA divisions I have put in the bottom of the ocean so far and I think I have about 2.5
This is the third convoy I have waylaid.

Besides the first 10 turns where you also lose ships fleeing the DEI/Hong Kong/Rangoon and Philippines I have been good about protecting my transports.
My only bad mistake was my opponent used AMCs as raiders in the south Pacific and found a group of my tankers and sunk three of my most valuable ones which makes my tanker shortage even more serious.

Otherwise I have been very careful with my convoys.

_____________________________

(in reply to wdolson)

Post #: 10

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/10/2016 2:34:06 PM

Fallschirmjager

Posts: 6793
Joined: 3/18/2002
From: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Status: offline

One final thing and I will shut up

In both cases, Allied radar played a huge role here. The weather was awful and my TF was able to detect his and get into good firing positions before he had a chance to react.
So yeah, radar and luck helped me a lot. If any of those IJN torpedo's had found their mark things could have ended much differently.

_____________________________

(in reply to Fallschirmjager)

Post #: 11

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/10/2016 2:41:29 PM

Andy Mac

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline

I never thought of Ironman as a PBEM scenario out of curiosity how does it play out ??

(in reply to Fallschirmjager)

Post #: 12

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/10/2016 3:07:17 PM

Admiral DadMan

Posts: 3627
Joined: 2/22/2002
From: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

I never thought of Ironman as a PBEM scenario out of curiosity how does it play out ??

I'm playing it PBeM as Allied right now (with some twists, like 3 more Allied CVs, BB's convertible to CV's, CLs convertible to CVLs and some AO/TK/AK/AP convertible to CVE). It's a rock'em sock'em game. Japan has advanced to the Society Islands, and there was a fierce battle for Christmas Island near Palmyra that saw me barely hold it with 4 Div and a ton of ART/CD.

_____________________________

Scenario 127: "Scraps of Paper"
(\../)
(O.o)
(> <)

CVB Langley:

(in reply to Andy Mac)

Post #: 13

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/10/2016 4:49:42 PM

Fallschirmjager

Posts: 6793
Joined: 3/18/2002
From: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

I never thought of Ironman as a PBEM scenario out of curiosity how does it play out ??

My opponent is not an idiot by any means. But I am a better player than him. Despite that, he is doing well.
Manila and Singapore lasted until late March but that is due to me sneaking in supply (and losing some ships in the process)

But elsewhere he has done well. The DEI is also complete conquered and he is wrapping in Sorejaba now in the second week of April.
He has also taken Port Moresby and I think will move on Fiji/Noumea and try and completly cute off Australia/NZ

His biggest success has been in Burma.
He has advanced so quickly that I am scrambling to get forces into place there.
He is two hexes outside of Imphal and Calcutta could be a spring objective for him.

He has also go all out in China and has began to move divisions out of China since he so completely crushed me in the first month of the war.

I will not be able to launch an offensive anywhere until early 43 because his air power is so completely over whelming.

But we are playing with unit withdrawals off so as I said before, what comes on the map I get to keep.

It has been a really fun PBEM game. The pace and amount of action makes every turn fun.
And if he messes up (and he will) then it is not crippling to him.

It is also fun having to guard every one of my convoys because of the AMCs you put into the game and the handful of German surface raiders you added.
I protect my south Pacific and Indian Ocean convoys well because of his contact shuffling about of surface raiders.

If you have a Japanese opponent of unequal skill and want to take the game to the summer of 1946 then it is a good PBEM scenario.
Plus we have a house rule that I am not allowed to use the Atomic bomb.
To 'win' I have to invade the HI. That should be a bloodbath in 45/56

We are pretty much ignoring points and going off how we end the game on the end date. If I control a bit of Japan and his cities are burnt to the ground then I win.
If we can keep me from invading and still clawing away at his defensive perimeter then he wins.

_____________________________

(in reply to Andy Mac)

Post #: 14

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/11/2016 12:23:03 AM

Gregg

Posts: 143
Joined: 7/26/2004
Status: offline

At such short range (one to four miles), the 14 inch AP projectiles could penetrate the Musashi's armor.
I'm surprised the computer did not have all four of the US BB's engaging the Musashi right from the start.
The allied heavy cruisers and destroyers should have been taking care of the Japanese light cruisers and destroyers.
But then again, the computer is not the smartest I've seen.
Gregg

(in reply to Fallschirmjager)

Post #: 15

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/11/2016 12:31:23 AM

Anachro

Posts: 2506
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline

On the flip-side I just had an engagement where the allies crossed my T, but still somehow ended up trading a destroyer for two sunk Northampton CA's. Thank the emperor (and battleships I guess) for night time surface action supremacy.

quote:

Night Time Surface Combat, near Midway Island at 158,91, Range 5,000 Yards

Allied aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft losses
SOC-1 Seagull: 2 destroyed

Japanese Ships
BB Ise, Shell hits 4
BB Hyuga, Shell hits 3
CA Aoba
CA Kinugasa, Shell hits 4, heavy fires
CA Furutaka, Shell hits 3, on fire
CA Kako
DD Shiranui
DD Urakaze
DD Oboro, Shell hits 1
DD Uzuki
DD Kikuzuki, Shell hits 5, heavy fires, heavy damage
DD Yuzuki

Allied Ships
CA Northampton, Shell hits 7, Torpedo hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
CA Chester, Shell hits 16, and is sunk
CL Honolulu, Shell hits 1
CL Phoenix, Shell hits 1
DD Farragut, Shell hits 4, heavy fires
DD Aylwin, Shell hits 2
DD Monaghan
DD Dale
DD Worden
DD Litchfield
DM Gamble

CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 5,000 yards
CONTACT: Allied lookouts spot Japanese task force at 5,000 yards
Shock, T. crosses the 'T'

< Message edited by Anachro -- 3/11/2016 12:32:28 AM >

(in reply to Gregg)

Post #: 16

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/11/2016 12:34:34 AM

Admiral DadMan

Posts: 3627
Joined: 2/22/2002
From: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
Status: offline

wow, that looks eerily like 1st Guadalcanal

_____________________________

Scenario 127: "Scraps of Paper"
(\../)
(O.o)
(> <)

CVB Langley:

(in reply to Anachro)

Post #: 17

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/11/2016 12:46:55 AM

Anachro

Posts: 2506
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline

Speaking of Guadalcanal, I also doing a Guadalcanal scenario with is reaching its climax, I suspect. Today, I also had a lucky nightime engagement in that PBEM. I guess the answer is to not engage the Japanese at night early on. Does the game eventually account for greater US nightfighting abilities due to radar fire control?

quote:

Night Time Surface Combat, near Tagula Island at 104,136, Range 8,000 Yards

Allied aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft losses
SOC-1 Seagull: 4 destroyed

Japanese Ships
BB Haruna, Shell hits 1
CA Takao
CA Maya
CA Haguro
CA Suzuya, Shell hits 2
CA Kumano
CL Sendai, Shell hits 4, on fire
DD Oyashio
DD Isokaze
DD Tokitsukaze
DD Urakaze
DD Hamakaze
DD Nowaki, on fire
DD Arashi

Allied Ships
BB South Dakota, Shell hits 5
CA Portland, Shell hits 5, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
CA Chicago
CA Astoria, Shell hits 13, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
CL Hobart, Shell hits 2
CLAA Juneau, Shell hits 3, on fire
CLAA San Diego
CL Helena, Shell hits 7, on fire
DD Farenholt, Shell hits 3, heavy fires
DD Barton
DD Welles, Shell hits 1
DD Worden
DD MacDonough
DD Warramunga

(in reply to Admiral DadMan)

Post #: 18

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/11/2016 12:55:56 AM

wdolson

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fallschirmjager

How accurate are the numbers of troops lost when you sink a transport ship like that?

I have always wondered. I am trying to keep up with the number of potential IJA divisions I have put in the bottom of the ocean so far and I think I have about 2.5
This is the third convoy I have waylaid.

Besides the first 10 turns where you also lose ships fleeing the DEI/Hong Kong/Rangoon and Philippines I have been good about protecting my transports.
My only bad mistake was my opponent used AMCs as raiders in the south Pacific and found a group of my tankers and sunk three of my most valuable ones which makes my tanker shortage even more serious.

Otherwise I have been very careful with my convoys.

The numbers of troops lost when you hit a ship aren't that accurate. They are almost always on the low side. I believe the algorithm only counts direct casualties from the attack and doesn't count casualties from subsequent fires or sinking.

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to Fallschirmjager)

Post #: 19

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/11/2016 1:09:48 AM

Admiral DadMan

Posts: 3627
Joined: 2/22/2002
From: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anachro
Speaking of Guadalcanal, I also doing a Guadalcanal scenario with is reaching its climax, I suspect. Today, I also had a lucky nightime engagement in that PBEM. I guess the answer is to not engage the Japanese at night early on. Does the game eventually account for greater US nightfighting abilities due to radar fire control?

What game date is this? Anytime before the US gets SG Radar and they still get crushed.

_____________________________

Scenario 127: "Scraps of Paper"
(\../)
(O.o)
(> <)

CVB Langley:

(in reply to Anachro)

Post #: 20

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/11/2016 1:21:20 AM

Anachro

Posts: 2506
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline

I believe that engagement happened in October 1942.

(in reply to Admiral DadMan)

Post #: 21

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/11/2016 1:39:51 AM

BBfanboy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anachro

Speaking of Guadalcanal, I also doing a Guadalcanal scenario with is reaching its climax, I suspect. Today, I also had a lucky nightime engagement in that PBEM. I guess the answer is to not engage the Japanese at night early on. Does the game eventually account for greater US nightfighting abilities due to radar fire control?

quote:

Night Time Surface Combat, near Tagula Island at 104,136, Range 8,000 Yards

Allied aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft losses
SOC-1 Seagull: 4 destroyed

Japanese Ships
BB Haruna, Shell hits 1
CA Takao
CA Maya
CA Haguro
CA Suzuya, Shell hits 2
CA Kumano
CL Sendai, Shell hits 4, on fire
DD Oyashio
DD Isokaze
DD Tokitsukaze
DD Urakaze
DD Hamakaze
DD Nowaki, on fire
DD Arashi

Allied Ships
BB South Dakota, Shell hits 5
CA Portland, Shell hits 5, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
CA Chicago
CA Astoria, Shell hits 13, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
CL Hobart, Shell hits 2
CLAA Juneau, Shell hits 3, on fire
CLAA San Diego
CL Helena, Shell hits 7, on fire
DD Farenholt, Shell hits 3, heavy fires
DD Barton
DD Welles, Shell hits 1
DD Worden
DD MacDonough
DD Warramunga

Alfred answered this a short time back. Radar in itself is not a battle winner - it has to be coupled with a crew that know how to use it - i.e. one with high experience.

_____________________________

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 Anachro)

Post #: 22

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/11/2016 6:35:51 PM

Admiral DadMan

Posts: 3627
Joined: 2/22/2002
From: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
Alfred answered this a short time back. Radar in itself is not a battle winner - it has to be coupled with a crew that know how to use it - i.e. one with high experience.

That is correct. As in the First Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, several USN ships had SG radar, but there was not enough experience to employ it properly.

That's in stark contrast to 2 nights later, when Adm Lee used the radar capabilities of USS Washington to tear apart Adm Kondo's force, notably Kirishima.

_____________________________

Scenario 127: "Scraps of Paper"
(\../)
(O.o)
(> <)

CVB Langley:

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 23

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/11/2016 8:05:04 PM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

The nice thing about you win is if you crew experience levels mirror stock then your surviving Allied ships that were seeing their first battle have now "seen the elephant" and should average about a 20 point boost in nighttime fighting skills.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Admiral DadMan)

Post #: 24

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/11/2016 8:14:16 PM

Fallschirmjager

Posts: 6793
Joined: 3/18/2002
From: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

The nice thing about you win is if you crew experience levels mirror stock then your surviving Allied ships that were seeing their first battle have now "seen the elephant" and should average about a 20 point boost in nighttime fighting skills.

Every ship involved in that battle now has a higher night EXP rating than day EXP rating

But I guess that is what happens when you face down a 70,000 ton battleship.

_____________________________

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 25

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/11/2016 10:31:48 PM

rustysi

Posts: 7472
Joined: 2/21/2012
From: LI, NY
Status: offline

quote:

But I guess that is what happens when you face down a 70,000 ton battleship.

Yeah, that and a necessary change of drawers.

_____________________________

It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once. Hume

In every party there is one member who by his all-too-devout pronouncement of the party principles provokes the others to apostasy. Nietzsche

Cave ab homine unius libri. Ltn Prvb

(in reply to Fallschirmjager)

Post #: 26

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/11/2016 10:37:57 PM

Big B

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
Alfred answered this a short time back. Radar in itself is not a battle winner - it has to be coupled with a crew that know how to use it - i.e. one with high experience.

That is correct. As in the First Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, several USN ships had SG radar, but there was not enough experience to employ it properly.

That's in stark contrast to 2 nights later, when Adm Lee used the radar capabilities of USS Washington to tear apart Adm Kondo's force, notably Kirishima.

As game advice, the above is absolutely correct.

As for the history of the 1st Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, I suggest reading Neptune's Inferno.
This battle has been the most misunderstood and misrepresented in the Pacific War. The book reveals that there were many untruths repeated about what went on, especially Callahan's use of radar...
Give it a read,

B

_____________________________

Big B's Shipyard

(in reply to Admiral DadMan)

Post #: 27

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/11/2016 11:05:47 PM

Admiral DadMan

Posts: 3627
Joined: 2/22/2002
From: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Big B

quote:

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
Alfred answered this a short time back. Radar in itself is not a battle winner - it has to be coupled with a crew that know how to use it - i.e. one with high experience.

That is correct. As in the First Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, several USN ships had SG radar, but there was not enough experience to employ it properly.

That's in stark contrast to 2 nights later, when Adm Lee used the radar capabilities of USS Washington to tear apart Adm Kondo's force, notably Kirishima.

As game advice, the above is absolutely correct.

As for the history of the 1st Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, I suggest reading Neptune's Inferno.
This battle has been the most misunderstood and misrepresented in the Pacific War. The book reveals that there were many untruths repeated about what went on, especially Callahan's use of radar...
Give it a read,

B

I'll have to re-read it. My dad was on Helena for that one. Damnedest thing he ever witnessed.

_____________________________

Scenario 127: "Scraps of Paper"
(\../)
(O.o)
(> <)

CVB Langley:

(in reply to Big B)

Post #: 28

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/11/2016 11:43:13 PM

Big B

Posts: 4870
Joined: 6/1/2005
From: Old Los Angeles pre-1960
Status: offline

The book points out that Callahan knew full well what he was facing, he devised a plan to engage point-blank with cruisers against battleships, and fully expected to die that night - all of which came true.
The author also points out that Callahan used his radar to redirect his force into the heart of the Japanese force - twice steering them back into the heart of their formation - to obtain point-blank range.
Another fallacy is the story that the confusion was complete, that the heavy cruiser San Francisco misidentified the Atlanta and fired into her. This is not true either, the Atlanta was the ship ahead of the San Francisco in line, while the latter was hotly engaging the battleship Hei, the squadron turned...the Atlanta being smaller and handier - with a smaller turning circle - turned sharper than the San Francisco and sailed directly into the latter's line of fire ...that's how the Atlanta was hit - not a mistaken target.

It's a fascinating read - and I'm sure a horrifying event IRL.

EDIT: I'm sorry I misspelled the great man's name it's Callaghan.... Rear Admiral Daniel J. Callaghan.

To- Fallschirmjager - Nice job by the way :)

< Message edited by Big B -- 3/12/2016 9:27:35 PM >

_____________________________

Big B's Shipyard

(in reply to Admiral DadMan)

Post #: 29

RE: My greatest USN surface victory - 3/13/2016 4:36:40 PM

Buckrock

Posts: 578
Joined: 3/16/2012
From: Not all there
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Big B

The book points out that Callahan knew full well what he was facing, he devised a plan to engage point-blank with cruisers against battleships, and fully expected to die that night - all of which came true.
The author also points out that Callahan used his radar to redirect his force into the heart of the Japanese force - twice steering them back into the heart of their formation - to obtain point-blank range.
Another fallacy is the story that the confusion was complete, that the heavy cruiser San Francisco misidentified the Atlanta and fired into her. This is not true either, the Atlanta was the ship ahead of the San Francisco in line, while the latter was hotly engaging the battleship Hei, the squadron turned...the Atlanta being smaller and handier - with a smaller turning circle - turned sharper than the San Francisco and sailed directly into the latter's line of fire ...that's how the Atlanta was hit - not a mistaken target.

It's a fascinating read - and I'm sure a horrifying event IRL.

EDIT: I'm sorry I misspelled the great man's name it's Callaghan.... Rear Admiral Daniel J. Callaghan.

I recently read the book. I remember Hornfischer touching on several of the things you mention but I also felt at the time that not all
the author's assertions came with convincing evidence. The suggested reasoning for Callaghan's actions in the battle was one of those
assertions.

IIRC, in one of the chapter notes, Hornfischer even acknowledged that there is no evidence that can confirm Callaghan's true intention was
to get to close range in order to give his cruisers a chance against battleships.

While I certainly found Hornfischer's account of that battle to be a worthwhile read, I didn't come away from it convinced as to what
Callaghan really may have intended that night.

On the matter of the Atlanta, I don't think Hornfischer stated her tighter turning circle accidently brought her into the San Francisco's
line of fire. IIRC, Hornfischer mentioned her tight turning circle making it difficult for San Francisco to follow, resulting in Atlanta
becoming separated from the following line of USN cruisers.

It was only some minutes later when Atlanta had been torpedoed and was drifting without engine power that Hornfischer mentioned her coming
into San Francisco's line of fire.

I can grab the book and double check if needed.

_____________________________

This was the only sig line I could think of.

(in reply to Big B)

Post #: 30