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: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

 
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] >> World in Flames >> After Action Report >> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR Page: <<   < prev  59 60 [61] 62 63   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/3/2017 3:12:49 PM   
ashkpa


Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline 		Polynesia, search rolls of 4/1 resulting in allies finding with 3 SP.
Moved damage column up one with 2 SP. The sub saved it's D roll and was aborted.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to ashkpa)
Post #: 1801
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/3/2017 9:04:46 PM   
rkr1958


Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ashkpa

MA42 i3:
E. Med searches of 9/2 result in one CW CA finding. The could engage the 4-box but at best do an A on the axis and take a D 2A, so I am having the CW avoid the combat. Let me know if you'd like to redo this.
Perfect!


_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)
Post #: 1802
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/3/2017 10:45:46 PM   
ashkpa


Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline 		Well, up to this point the rolls have gone the allied way.
New Zealand Coast 6/6 -> no contact
E. Indian Ocean 9/5 -> no contact
Arabian Sea 4/10 -> no contact
Coral Sea 2/1 both find with 0 SP, sub takes a D which it saves. {thought my luck was turning, but then the allies roll a 1}
Big battles yet to come.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to rkr1958)
Post #: 1803
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/3/2017 10:55:28 PM   
ashkpa


Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline 		Next up:
Cape Naturaliste rolls of 10/1 result in no contact
South China Sea rolls of 4/3 result in the axis finding the 0-box with 4 SP.
Naval Air and SP used to move damage up to 2D 3A. I will apply the D's versus the CW and US convoy. Assuming the FR will have extra naval moves to use more often than the other two powers. If you'd like it changed, let me know. And is there a preference for the abort location. I'm going to move towards Madagascar unless I hear otherwise.

I will take a short break before heading into the big areas.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to ashkpa)
Post #: 1804
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/3/2017 11:47:43 PM   
ashkpa


Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline 		I tried to intercept the fleeing CP (from the SCS), but it appeared to not be intercept-able in the BoBeng and the game would not let me move it through the E. Indian Ocean. I may try to recreate later, but at this point it is inconsequential.

I have initiated in the BoB and reacted another GE fighter out. The US does have fighters that could react out. Will they?




Attachment (1)

(in reply to ashkpa)
Post #: 1805
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/3/2017 11:55:15 PM   
rkr1958


Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ashkpa

I tried to intercept the fleeing CP (from the SCS), but it appeared to not be intercept-able in the BoBeng and the game would not let me move it through the E. Indian Ocean. I may try to recreate later, but at this point it is inconsequential.

I have initiated in the BoB and reacted another GE fighter out. The US does have fighters that could react out. Will they?
Fly all four fighters to the 2-box.


_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)
Post #: 1806
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/4/2017 12:40:03 AM   
ashkpa


Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline 		The lightning can only make it to the 1-box. Orders?

(in reply to ashkpa)
Post #: 1807
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/4/2017 12:55:37 AM   
rkr1958


Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ashkpa

The lightning can only make it to the 1-box. Orders?
Lightning flies to the 0-box to join their RAF allies.


_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)
Post #: 1808
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/4/2017 1:11:05 AM   
ashkpa


Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline 		BoB rnd 1: rolls of 2/4 resulted in only the axis finding.
They engage the CW 4 box with 1 SP and make it a naval air.
The AA resulted in 2 NAV factors screen.
There was a D A applied against the CW.
Axis place the D against the Renown, which failed it's damage control.
I thought you'd then place the A also against the Renown, to get it out of harms way.
I also am assuming you will stay for round 2.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to rkr1958)
Post #: 1809
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/4/2017 1:14:49 AM   
ashkpa


Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline 		Round 2, we both find on rolls of 2/1. You have 2 SP. I did make it a naval air. The two GE fighter bombers are flying as fighters.
How do you wish to spend the SP?




Attachment (1)

(in reply to ashkpa)
Post #: 1810
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/4/2017 1:19:07 AM   
rkr1958


Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline 		Increase allied air-to-air by 1 column. US fighters will target German fighters if they get the chance.

< Message edited by rkr1958 -- 1/4/2017 1:20:09 AM >

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)
Post #: 1811
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/4/2017 1:39:07 AM   
ashkpa


Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline 		Missed getting the image of the A-A results. It went three rounds.
First round the Allies rolled low (4 or 5) shooting down the FW190. The Allies then aborted the Thunderbolt (back to S W England) on a 14.
Second round, the Allies cleared a bomber on a 10 and the axis shot down the first Wildcat on a high roll (16 or 17).
Third round, the allies shoot down the Italian Re.2001 on a 4 and the axis shoot down the last Wildcat on a 5.
The AA was good, screening 3 points of NAV and the damage to the fleet was a D 2A. In the end aborting all of the ships.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to rkr1958)
Post #: 1812
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/4/2017 1:41:38 AM   
ashkpa


Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline 		Round 3 search rolls were 7/2 resulting in an end to the combat.

I aborted your 3 ships to Plymouth.

< Message edited by ashkpa -- 1/4/2017 1:43:10 AM >

(in reply to ashkpa)
Post #: 1813
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/4/2017 1:45:44 AM   
ashkpa


Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline 		In the Solomons the search rolls were 7/3. Allies find with 5 SP. How will you spend them?
Storm in this zone, so no naval air combat.

Edit: breaking for dinner.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by ashkpa -- 1/4/2017 1:46:12 AM >

(in reply to ashkpa)
Post #: 1814
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/4/2017 1:59:12 AM   
rkr1958


Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ashkpa

In the Solomons the search rolls were 7/3. Allies find with 5 SP. How will you spend them?
Storm in this zone, so no naval air combat.
Avoid combat.


_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)
Post #: 1815
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/4/2017 3:04:41 AM   
ashkpa


Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline 		The last sea zone is the Marianas.
Search rolls of 1/2 result in both finding (3-boxes are engaged) with 1 SP. I made it a naval air and have allocated my CVP as fighters and bombers. It is your decision time now.
How do you want them distributed.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to rkr1958)
Post #: 1816
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/4/2017 3:36:04 AM   
rkr1958


Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline 		Fighters: F4F-4, P-40c, F4F-3, SDB-4

Bombers: PBY-1, SBD-3, TBD

I'll use the default order that the program gives for both my fighters and bombers. USN air units will continue to fight until the status of all bombers have be determined. USN fighters will target Japanese bomber units. Any US bombers that get through will target Japanese carriers in the order of Hiryu, Zukaku, Shokaku, Kaga with the exception that carriers with loaded planes of 2 or more will get first priority. Now isn't that optimistic!

P.S. It's my bedtime.

I fully expect to wake to read of a slaughter of US carriers in the Marianas. Sort of a reverse Midway.

< Message edited by rkr1958 -- 1/4/2017 4:06:53 AM >

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)
Post #: 1817
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/4/2017 5:43:01 AM   
ashkpa


Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline 		Well, you fighter pilots flew well, here and in the BoB.
A-A went your way, but not totally and I got a few bombers through with the loss of one bomber. You had no planes shot down. I aborted the PBY to Wake Is.

Here are the A-A results.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to rkr1958)
Post #: 1818
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/4/2017 5:47:44 AM   
ashkpa


Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline 		MA42 i3: Marianas
Here is the final result. I had issues with the screen capture program and had to restart it once I figured it out, but therefore did not get all the images I wanted.
Here is the information Your AA versus JP bombers were 2,10,9 (reduced air-sea factors to 6, reduced by rain to 3)
Here is the information for my AA versus the US bombers 8,3,9,6 (screened all 2 of the air-sea factors)
The Saratoga was selected and failed it's damage control with a 5 and therefore was damaged.
The next damage I put on the Northhampton and that was on a 9.

Will you stay for round 2 - information in the image below.
And if not, where do you wish to abort.





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by ashkpa -- 1/4/2017 5:49:59 AM >

(in reply to ashkpa)
Post #: 1819
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/4/2017 5:49:25 AM   
ashkpa


Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline 		Also, will you want to initiate combat in the China Sea (you did not intercept when I moved through and that image on what is present is still valid)

(in reply to ashkpa)
Post #: 1820
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/4/2017 12:41:51 PM   
rkr1958


Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline 		Marianas - The USN will retire (i.e., abort) from the Sea Area. My preference for the PBY is to have it aborted to hex [121,181] in New Guinea. Otherwise, I don't believe there's anywhere for the P-40c fighter to abort to. If there is then you can leave the PBY where it is at Wake. The West Virginia and CP in the 0-box go to Midway. The USN carriers and heavy cruisers in the 3-box go to Pearl Harbor.

China Sea - USN subs engage as long as Japanese CPs remain in the China Sea. If given the opportunity they will use surprise points to maximize damage/aborts to the CPs up to the point that they can guarantee all the CPs are gone. After that any remaining SPs are used to reduce damage against them.

< Message edited by rkr1958 -- 1/4/2017 12:42:50 PM >

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)
Post #: 1821
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/4/2017 6:37:38 PM   
ashkpa


Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline 		Using your editing techniques, the PBY is now in New Guinea.
In the China sea the search rolls were 10/5, which resulted in no contact.

(in reply to rkr1958)
Post #: 1822
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/4/2017 6:44:15 PM   
ashkpa


Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline 		MA42 i3: Ground Strike
The Bulgarians need more practice.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to ashkpa)
Post #: 1823
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/4/2017 7:22:38 PM   
ashkpa


Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline 		MA42 i3: Land Attacks
One Attack against isolated GAR. The two bombers in Vilna could support. I have nothing that could intercept.
Will you?




Attachment (1)

(in reply to ashkpa)
Post #: 1824
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/4/2017 11:00:17 PM   
rkr1958


Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ashkpa

MA42 i3: Land Attacks
One Attack against isolated GAR. The two bombers in Vilna could support. I have nothing that could intercept.
Will you?
No thank you.

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)
Post #: 1825
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/5/2017 12:00:23 AM   
ashkpa


Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline 		Land combat is anti-climatic.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to rkr1958)
Post #: 1826
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/5/2017 12:01:37 AM   
ashkpa


Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline 		MA42 i3: HQ Reorg
Germans do some re-organization.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to ashkpa)
Post #: 1827
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/5/2017 1:40:58 AM   
rkr1958


Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline 		Turn 16. Mar/Apr 1942. Allied #6. Actions.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)
Post #: 1828
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/5/2017 1:44:51 AM   
rkr1958


Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline 		Turn 16. Mar/Apr 1942. Allied #6. USN Moves. North Sea. Possible Axis Intercept Attempts.

The USN moves four groups into the North Sea which the axis could try to intercept. Which group(s) would they like to attempt to intercept and which unit would they like to use for the attempt?

Group 1. BB Texas, CA Vincenees, Amph(empty).

Group 2. BB Arkansas, Amph(empty), TRS(empty).

Group 3. CV Wasp, CA Pensacola, CA Louisville, CA Indianapolis.

Group 4. CA Wichita.

By the way, it's going to be an early evening and bedtime for me. I won't get back to my turn until tomorrow after work.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by rkr1958 -- 1/5/2017 1:46:01 AM >

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)
Post #: 1829
RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 1/5/2017 2:53:28 AM   
ashkpa


Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline
quote:

Turn 16. Mar/Apr 1942. Allied #6. USN Moves. North Sea. Possible Axis Intercept Attempts.

The USN moves four groups into the North Sea which the axis could try to intercept. Which group(s) would they like to attempt to intercept and which unit would they like to use for the attempt?

Group 1. BB Texas, CA Vincenees, Amph(empty).

Group 2. BB Arkansas, Amph(empty), TRS(empty).

Group 3. CV Wasp, CA Pensacola, CA Louisville, CA Indianapolis.

Group 4. CA Wichita.

assume the North Sea reference above should be BoB. Yes, I'll try to intercept each of them the Ju88c will initiate.

(in reply to rkr1958)
Post #: 1830
Page:   <<   < prev  59 60 [61] 62 63   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> After Action Report >> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR Page: <<   < prev  59 60 [61] 62 63   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

0.672