RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

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 80 81 [82] 83 84 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/19/2017 11:42:56 PM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Start of Turn. Trade.

With Archangel being the only Soviet port in the Arctic and the likelihood of that port being frozen in, the USA regrettably stops their Arctic convoys to the Soviet Union for the time being. The USA, does however, start up a new convoy of 3 BPs to England.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2431

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/20/2017 12:05:55 AM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Beginning of the Turn. Determination of Initiative.

Regardless of weather it would be an unmitigated disaster if Pat got the initiative again this turn and moved first. Pat won the initiative last turn and was rewarded with to impulses in a row (last two turns previously and first last turn) and both with fine weather. Pat had the last impulse of last turn. It wasn't easy and I had to request a re-roll but finally I won a initiative roll. I had lost the last four rolls for initiative before I finally won this one. I'd lost the first roll this turn, both rolls last turn (I requested a re-roll) and the second roll the turn before that (Pat had requested a re-roll then).

Now let's see what the weather has in store for us.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2432

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/20/2017 12:08:14 AM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #1. Weather.

Wow ... we go from fine across the globe most of last turn, including the last impulse of last turn, to this. Old man winter, or as Stalin likes to refer to him, Colonel Winter has arrived.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2433

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/20/2017 12:12:53 AM

rkr1958

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

I'll need to stop for the evening here as my next impulse requires some serious planning and execution on all fronts.

But first I plan to take a break and relax by watching an episode of Agatha Christie's Poirot. Who knows, I may even have a drink.

Good evening all ...

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2434

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/21/2017 11:03:48 PM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #1. Actions.

The USA plays on o-chit and takes a super-combined. This is the first o-chit played by any allied power this game.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2435

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/22/2017 12:12:26 AM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1940. Allied #1. Post Allied Naval Move. ETO.

This screen cap shows the disposition of allied forces in the Bay of Biscay, Cape St. Vincent and Portugal post allied naval moves. The axis have no naval or air units in place to interfere with these forces this impulse.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2436

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/22/2017 12:14:50 AM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1940. Allied #1. Contested Sea Area. Polynesia. No Combat.

The USN elects not to attempt to initiate combat and the axis don't have the opportunity to try in the Polynesia sea area.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2437

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/22/2017 12:17:07 AM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1940. Allied #1. Contested Sea Area. Tasman Sea. Initiate?.

The USN and RN elect not to attempt to initiate but the IJN may is they wish in the Tasman Sea area.

1. Do you wish to try to initiate in the Tasman Sea? Is so, what are your instructions for the attempted battle?

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2438

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/22/2017 12:19:41 AM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #1. China Sea. IJN Air React?

USN subs will attempt to initiate combat in the China Sea.

2. Which air units react and to which sea box do they react? What are you instructions for this potential battle?

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2439

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/22/2017 12:20:58 AM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #1. Bismarck Sea. IJN Air React?

The USN will attempt to initiate combat in the Bismark Sea.

3. Which air units react and to which sea box do they react? What are you instructions for this potential battle?

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2440

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/22/2017 11:26:42 PM

ashkpa

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

quote:

1. Do you wish to try to initiate in the Tasman Sea? Is so, what are your instructions for the attempted battle?

I will not at this time.

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2441

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/22/2017 11:37:09 PM

ashkpa

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

quote:

2. Which air units react and to which sea box do they react? What are you instructions for this potential battle?

The B5N2 will react to the 2-box. The Ki-27 will react to the 0-box. I believe 4 surprise points would be enough to ensure the subs are taken care of, so I will fight and maximize damage to the subs with a naval air fight (if I find).

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2442

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/22/2017 11:40:21 PM

ashkpa

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

quote:

3. Which air units react and to which sea box do they react? What are you instructions for this potential battle?

I'd like to know what you have in the Marianna's and the Solomons before making this decision. Are their significant naval forces in other Pacific Sea Zones?

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2443

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/23/2017 1:33:35 AM

rkr1958

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: ashkpa

quote:

3. Which air units react and to which sea box do they react? What are you instructions for this potential battle?

I'd like to know what you have in the Marianna's and the Solomons before making this decision. Are their significant naval forces in other Pacific Sea Zones?

With the exception of the Hawaiian islands sea area, which contains the newest USN aircraft carrier and battleship, USN Pacific fleet carriers, number of battleships and heavy cruisers are still docked in Pearl.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2444

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/23/2017 1:40:12 AM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #1. USN. China Sea. No Contact.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2445

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/23/2017 5:10:58 AM

ashkpa

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

quote:

3. Which air units react and to which sea box do they react? What are you instructions for this potential battle?

Thanks for the extra information.
The 9 range fighter new New Britain (Vitu) will react out to the 2-box. The fighter in Saipan will react to the 0-box.

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2446

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/23/2017 11:33:03 PM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #1. Bismarck Sea. Round 1.

USN sinks the IJN CP and decides to stay. Do remaining Japanese forces stay? If so, do any additional Japanese air units react?

Please don't take this as gloating. I'm just excited that one of may plans this game actually worked out. I understand that my "euphoria" over this "victory" will likely be short lived as Pat has a way of doing that to me. My objective for this combat, which could very well continue this impulse if Pat decides to stay, was to put the IJN forces on the (eastern) edges of the Bismarck Sea out of supply, specifically the impressive Japanese force at Truk. That was my objective and I was able to accomplish that through a set of fortunate search rolls (3 for the allies and 10 for the axis) and, if I may say so myself, through a bit of discipline on my part in how I used the resulting 11 surprise points. That's what I love about this game, it tempts you into making real-time decisions that may be in conflict with your immediate objectives. In this case, sinking the sole IJN convoy point operating in the Bismarck Sea in order to put a significant IJN force out of supply. I understand that Pat will immediately correct that situation next impulse but this will require him to use at least 1 of the 2 Japanese naval moves in a combine or take a naval to put his forces back in supply.

Back to this round. I was surely tempted to let combat default to a naval air combat and use all 11 SPs to try to shoot down or abort one or both of his fighters that reacted. Now, if I did that, I would risk losing my chance to sink the lone CP if he got lucky against my NAV, which was the only plane I have in the area with air to sea factors. At first glance it seemed a "waste" surprise points just to sink 1 CP. However, the sole objective of this combat wasn't about trying to shoot down Japanese fighters or maximizing Japanese units lost, it was putting a significant Japanese forces out of supply. So, I used 4 SP's to select a sub combat and 6 of the remaining 7 to increase damage from an A to 2D, A. Though, really only 2 SP's were needed to sink the convoy (i.e., A to an D).

Well, anyway the USN celebrates for now as for tomorrow they may need to don their life-vests and take up positions of their life-boats.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2447

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/24/2017 12:45:15 AM

ashkpa

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

quote:

USN sinks the IJN CP and decides to stay. Do remaining Japanese forces stay? If so, do any additional Japanese air units react?

Yes, I will stay. I will avoid combat if given the option.

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2448

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/24/2017 2:12:05 AM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #1. USN. Bismarck Sea. Round 2.

The Japanese fighter "aborts" after the first round of air-to-air. Both sides stay.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2449

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/24/2017 2:13:18 AM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #1. USN. Bismarck Sea. Round 3.

The battle of the Bismarck Sea finished up with a second round of bloodless air to air combat. Combat ends as no more Japanese forces remain in the sea area.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2450

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/24/2017 2:51:55 AM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #1. Western Allies. Portugal.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2451

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/24/2017 2:53:19 AM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #1. USSR, Europe.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2452

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/24/2017 2:54:05 AM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #1. USSR, Asia.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2453

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/24/2017 2:54:43 AM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #1. CW, India, Burma.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2454

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 3/24/2017 2:57:08 AM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #1. CW. Libya. Egypt.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2455

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 4/8/2017 3:46:02 AM

ashkpa

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

ND 42 i4:
First, sorry for the longer delay. A coworker has been sick and will be out until at least May. I have been picking up a portion of his work load (doubling the courses I've been teaching) and that has put a crimp into my play time.

The axis actions: GE and IT land, JP a combined.
Japan moves a NAV and FIG to the 3-box of the Arabian Sea. Move a CP from Bangkok to the Bismark Sea and 4 CA to the W Indian Ocean (trying to engage the CW transport).
The JP do not initiate in three zones (China Sea, Polyensia, and Tasman Sea).
They do initiate in the Arabian Sea, but rolls of 7/10 (axis/allies) result in no contact.
In the W Indian Ocean the search rolls of 8/1 result in the CW finding with 6 SP. How would you like to spend them?

Attachment (1)

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2456

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 4/8/2017 4:29:09 PM

rkr1958

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

quote:

In the W Indian Ocean the search rolls of 8/1 result in the CW finding with 6 SP. How would you like to spend them?

Avoid combat.

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2457

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 4/9/2017 3:30:14 AM

ashkpa

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

Avoided in the W. Indian Ocean.

I assumed the US would try to find the CP providing supply.
The JP reacted out a fighter to the 0-box and a fighter and NAV to the 3-box.
I had the US sub go deep.
1st round the allies roll a 1 and the axis a 10 (10/1). I had them only engage the 0-box with 13 SP.
Saved 6 SP to move damage up (needed to save at least 4 SP to get the damage to a D, and the other 2 did not modify the A-A combat).
moved the air combat to +4/-3 with 6 SP.
JP cleared the bomber, and the US did no damage to the JP plane. JP aborted the A-A at that time.
There is a bug in the use of the surprise points in that the screen where you use them was not showing the right result, but when I went on to the next screen, it did have the right result - sinking the CP. Two see both screens go to the issue report folder.

Both sides stayed in the zone. This time the US rolled a 10 and the JP a 5 resulting in the end of combat.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2458

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 4/9/2017 3:59:08 AM

ashkpa

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

ND42 i4: Axis Ground strikes.
There are 4 ground strikes. One in Libya the allies have no possible reaction to.
The one in Lisbon can be reacted to by multiple planes.
The ones in Rostov and Vladivostok can only be reacted to by the fighters in the hex.

What will react?

Attachment (1)

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2459

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 4/9/2017 4:00:31 PM

rkr1958

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

1. Lisbon. The RAF spitfire and the US P-38F will intercept. They will target the bomber and will stay until the status of the bomber is determined. They then will return to base to their current hexes.

2. Rostov. The I-16 Soviet fighter will intercept. It will target the bomber and will stay until the status of the bomber is determined and return to base to Rostov.

3. Vladivostok. The Soviet fighter will intercept. It will target the bomber and will stay until the status of the bomber is determined and return to base to Vladivostok.

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2460