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: July 1944

 
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: July 1944 Page: <<   < prev  129 130 [131] 132 133   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: July 1944 - 4/21/2017 1:14:05 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Chickenboy and Hans are dead right as to Musashi and Nagato. Nagato is stuck because of the stupid upgrade but Musashi will be able to move tomorrow. She'll be escorted down to Soerabaja. Since the SYS damage is not major, the repairs should work without issue. We'll work to get her back into decent form and then try to bring her back...

Nagato will have to be used as a bomber bait. Very sad...


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 3901
RE: July 1944 - 4/21/2017 1:16:06 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		When I get to my turn this morning I intend to publish my production numbers for all current aircraft. Figure this is a good chance for people to see late-war numbers, get yelled at for not producing enough, and use it as a learning opportunity for other players...



_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 3902
RE: July 1944 - 4/21/2017 1:25:02 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Heck. He still does this all the time presently. Currently have single ship TFs around the Aleutians, the Marshalls, and Marcus.


The Devil really is in the details for this sort of behavior. I agree that using xAKLs in singletons or pairs to soak off carrier sorties is gamey as Hell. But I've got no problems with using PB,PC,DD,PG,AMc,AM or other 'military' versions of ships on picket duty.

The common cry is that the Allies don't get enough of these to convert for picket duty? Too bad. So sad. Use a Fletcher then.

The game engine still does a poor job of disregarding these singletons when putting together anti-ship packages. So you have a couple xAKLs that *still* get targeted with 15DBs or TBs from a carrier strike.

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 3903
RE: July 1944 - 4/21/2017 1:38:50 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Musashi will be able to move tomorrow. She'll be escorted down to Soerabaja. Since the SYS damage is not major, the repairs should work without issue. We'll work to get her back into decent form and then try to bring her back...

Nagato will have to be used as a bomber bait. Very sad...


Two thoughts:

First one: I think you'll never see Mushashi again if you send her to Soerbaja. That port will be in range of B-29s soon if not already.

The Java Sea will be crawling with submarines slavering at the mouth to catch a TK/AO convoy en route. With Miri and Brunei in the bag for the Allies, these make excellent bases to stick an AS at and support local and regional submarine interdiction efforts. Very short range to targets of opportunity there. I think a lurking submarine would be more than happy to put some functional torpedoes into Mushashi's side while moving to or from Soerbaja, thus negating any benefit derived.

John: Your defenses in the DEI are being cut in half. The pivotal battles WON'T be fought over Sumatra or Java, but much closer to the home islands. Putting a superbattleship in a closed off pocket means that it probably won't be able to participate any further in any meaningful fashion and can be further damaged at your opponent's leisure. I would probably try to figure out a way for her to crawl back to the home islands if I wanted her to contribute for the rest of the war.

This is, of course, a warning for any other fleet elements that are 'cut off' or soon will be. The opportunity to move 'em out and get them back home is coming to an end. Soon you'll have to fight to get them through the enemy cordon.

Second thought: I love the idea of using Nagato as a CAP trap, just maybe not disbanded at port. How about moving her closer to the action and putting her in port as a 1-ship TF? That should preferentially attract carrier air strikes. Escorted DBs and TBs sucked into a CAP trap? Yummy.... UNescorted DBs or TBs? [shudders...]

< Message edited by Chickenboy -- 4/21/2017 1:57:03 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 3904
RE: July 1944 - 4/21/2017 1:48:50 PM   
Encircled


Posts: 2024
Joined: 12/30/2010
From: Northern England
Status: offline
quote:

UJO: "They'll be back up in 5 minutes, sir."
Captain: "Bull****. This thing'll be over with in two minutes!"


Still the best line in that film is

"But you remember one thing: if you screw up just this much, you'll be flying a cargo plane full of rubber dog **** out of Hong Kong"

_____________________________


(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 3905
RE: July 1944 - 4/21/2017 1:49:54 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

I would gladly trade some system damage for a shot at un-escorted daytime flying B29s! It is a great trap.

How many total fighters did you have on duty over Singers?




Believe that there were just at 70. If he comes back tomorrow--doubtful--then it will be about 100. Lowpe: TOTALLY concur! Am moving the CVs in this direction and will add a whole passel of Sams to the mix the day after tomorrow. Would love for a bunch of B-29s to come over and meet 150+ top line fighters. VERY NICE!




You guys are living in a dream world.

Ships sink from max system damage just as quickly as the sink from max flotation or fire damage.
You incurre4d 50 sys damage from ONE raid.

You need to let that sink in before you claim this is a great exchange.


When I said it, I didn't have the damage report done to the ships, but still...it isn't too bad because of the following.

Those ships are basically out of the game anyhow. That they drew a heavy strike and inflicted damage on the bombers, which could be used to trash the economy instead is I think a victory. That the Allies need to stand down the B29s for a few days even better.


Hopefully, this a tactic that Japan can pursue more times. It takes about 300 regular plane losses to pay off for losing a battleship this way which would make for a very good trade.

If the Allies divert forces to destroy the ship, rather than close on the HI even better!

This is late game Japan, Hans. Where anytime you can trade your VP at less than a 2-1 ratio, well that then is a victory. Anytime you can divert and delay...that is a victory. It is much easier for Japan to recover BB VP as cap traps than at sea where they are torpedo magnets for all subs; outclassed and outgunned by Allied ships.

Ideally, I would liked to have seen John concentrate his fleet to protect the HI economy...months ago. Everything west of Samah is basically gone. If those ships helped delay attacks on the HI by a week...well then at this point I call that a victory.


(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 3906
RE: July 1944 - 4/21/2017 1:56:06 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Musashi will be able to move tomorrow. She'll be escorted down to Soerabaja. Since the SYS damage is not major, the repairs should work without issue. We'll work to get her back into decent form and then try to bring her back...

Nagato will have to be used as a bomber bait. Very sad...


Two thoughts:

First one: I think you'll never see Mushashi again if you send her to Soerbaja. That port will be in range of B-29s soon if not already.

The Java Sea will be crawling with submarines slavering at the mouth to catch a TK/AO convoy en route. With Miri and Brunei in the bag for the Allies, these make excellent bases to stick an AS at and support local and regional submarine interdiction efforts. Very short range to targets of opportunity there. I think a lurking submarine would be more than happy to put some functional torpedoes into Mushashi's side while moving to or from Soerbaja, thus negating any benefit derived.

John: Your defenses in the DEI are being cut in half. The pivotal battles WON'T be fought over Sumatra or Java, but much closer to the home islands. Putting a superbattleship in a closed off pocket means that it probably won't be able to participate any further in any meaningful fashion and can be further damaged at your opponent's leisure. I would probably try to figure out a way for her to crawl back to the home islands if I wanted her to contribute for the rest of the war.

This is, of course, a warning for any other fleet elements that are 'cut off' or soon will be. The opportunity to move 'em out and get them back home is coming to an end. Soon you'll have to fight to get them through the enemy cordon.

Second thought: I love the idea of using Nagato as a CAP trap, just maybe not at port. How about moving her closer to the action and putting her in port as a 1-ship TF? That should preferentially attract carrier air strikes. Escorted DBs and TBs sucked into a CAP trap? Yummy.... UNescorted DBs or TBs? [shudders...]


+1. But I believe the Nagato is stuck in upgrade. I would not recommend using battleships alone, give them some E's for flak protection.

Also, I would recommend you search your fleets for AR, AD, AS, AG and start thinking about making hidden ship repair facilities (along with naval support). You can make very strong system damage repair facilities in very tiny bases that are unlikely to attract bombers.

The days of repairing ships in drydock are rapidly coming to a close...and have come to a close anywhere west of Tokyo.






(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 3907
RE: July 1944 - 4/21/2017 2:00:22 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Encircled

quote:

UJO: "They'll be back up in 5 minutes, sir."
Captain: "Bull****. This thing'll be over with in two minutes!"


Still the best line in that film is

"But you remember one thing: if you screw up just this much, you'll be flying a cargo plane full of rubber dog **** out of Hong Kong"



_____________________________


(in reply to Encircled)
Post #: 3908
RE: July 1944 - 4/21/2017 2:03:30 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
This is being corrected and once these two bad boys enter the production line we should be able to fill everyone out and cause some serious bellyache for the Allied bombing campaign. .



"bad boys" -

explain how Frank and Ki100 are better than P47,Spit,Corsair or P51D (only mnvr is better and b- Frank has 20mm the Allies "only" 50cal, but they do not need more: 50cal can kill everything the Japanese have (only the late Emily might cause probs), while 12,7 of IJ cant kill most Allied bombers easily and even has trouble vs. some fighters).

But lets hear - perhaps you mod boosts these planes too much compared to stock so cna be named bad boys Every 2nd player plays with different (mod)values, so this causes confusion too I noted already.



As the Japanese GO...these are 'bad boys!'



John is absolutely correct....the Ki100-I and the Frank B are the two best Army bomber killers that Japan is ever likely to see in a game. They are bad boys. It is just too bad Japan isn't also adding the Frank R.

If I could trade 3000 Ki100I and Franks to destroy 1000 Jugs prior to 1945, well then that would be a great Japanese victory. And it is doable.

The addition of these two fighters help Japan immensely...mainly because Japan under estimated how much fighter production they were going to need.



(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 3909
RE: July 1944 - 4/21/2017 2:06:51 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Heck. He still does this all the time presently. Currently have single ship TFs around the Aleutians, the Marshalls, and Marcus.


The Devil really is in the details for this sort of behavior. I agree that using xAKLs in singletons or pairs to soak off carrier sorties is gamey as Hell. But I've got no problems with using PB,PC,DD,PG,AMc,AM or other 'military' versions of ships on picket duty.

The common cry is that the Allies don't get enough of these to convert for picket duty? Too bad. So sad. Use a Fletcher then.

The game engine still does a poor job of disregarding these singletons when putting together anti-ship packages. So you have a couple xAKLs that *still* get targeted with 15DBs or TBs from a carrier strike.



CR uses YMS's for this task. They are misnamed as they are not yard craft, but instead are deep water capable ships with 3500 endurance.
I see no issue with using YMSs for picket duty.
xAKLs sure, but minesweepers no.
My two pennies for what its worth.


and sorry if "dream world" was over the top.

< Message edited by HansBolter -- 4/21/2017 2:07:55 PM >

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 3910
RE: July 1944 - 4/21/2017 2:10:41 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
Heck. He still does this all the time presently. Currently have single ship TFs around the Aleutians, the Marshalls, and Marcus.


The Devil really is in the details for this sort of behavior. I agree that using xAKLs in singletons or pairs to soak off carrier sorties is gamey as Hell. But I've got no problems with using PB,PC,DD,PG,AMc,AM or other 'military' versions of ships on picket duty.

The common cry is that the Allies don't get enough of these to convert for picket duty? Too bad. So sad. Use a Fletcher then.

The game engine still does a poor job of disregarding these singletons when putting together anti-ship packages. So you have a couple xAKLs that *still* get targeted with 15DBs or TBs from a carrier strike.



CR uses YMS's for this task. They are misnamed as they are not yard craft, but instead are deep water capable ships with 3500 endurance.
I see no issue with using YMSs for picket duty.
xAKLs sure, but minesweepers no.
My two pennies for what its worth.


I agree. As YMSs also carry an ASW rating of 1 (IIRC), they also provide a useful submarine screen around harbors, further rationalizing their presence outside of Allied ports.

It's a lousy duty to draw-akin to the dreaded radar picket DDs and DEs at Okinawa-but is fair game as far as I'm concerned.

_____________________________


(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 3911
RE: July 1944 - 4/21/2017 2:21:05 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


and sorry if "dream world" was over the top.


Hans, it isn't over the top, for goodness sake.

And JFB's do live in a dream world anyhow.



< Message edited by Lowpe -- 4/21/2017 2:22:18 PM >

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 3912
RE: July 1944 - 4/21/2017 2:29:01 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 2116
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Yep. Turn about is fair play. It was talked about over and over. He doesn't see anything wrong with the tactic so fine. Simple as that. Will address the topic in my next match. Note that I am at using my ships in pairs and not just little single ships probing around looking to be sunk.

Heck. He still does this all the time presently. Currently have single ship TFs around the Aleutians, the Marshalls, and Marcus.



Is this really the case ? Than I can commend you as in IJ player for sure. Also that planes did not get upgrades in your mod - this helps Allies quite a bit (esp. from 43 on imo). If we consider that the "stock" values of 3-4 IJ modells are too low in speed even more so. We need to see however that the testing of planes the US AAF did, was what I assume under perfect conditions. The Japanese did not have these conditions anymore from 44 on. Only in the big bases in the HI and perhaps Singapore etc. (asfaik).

EDIT2: John can you post speed of Ki100 in your mod ? The orig stock value is lousy 360.

With 4E port strikes sadly it so some of the bombers almost everytime get through and score hits. Not so much with 2Es and depending on your CAP and AA units ofc. I learned even in July 42 they can strike at Shortlands (sank there an CVE+ good DD) I pulled my ships back to Rabaul and Manus, Kavieng....only if heavy damaged ships need to be saved to the nearer ports, but then try to send more CAP fighters and/or increase CAP%...I had mostly only barges, small mineships and a single AKE for reloading at the bases in perfect 4E range. He sank my ACMs tho so no minetending anymore

Edit, the single ships issue, if single DDs or at least DEs are used this is fair play, real war tactic (picket ships)

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 4/21/2017 2:52:09 PM >

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 3913
RE: July 1944 - 4/21/2017 2:30:57 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe
And JFB's do live in a dream world anyhow.




_____________________________


(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3914
RE: July 1944 - 4/21/2017 2:34:10 PM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 2116
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

John is absolutely correct....the Ki100-I and the Frank B are the two best Army bomber killers that Japan is ever likely to see in a game. They are bad boys. It is just too bad Japan isn't also adding the Frank R.

If I could trade 3000 Ki100I and Franks to destroy 1000 Jugs prior to 1945, well then that would be a great Japanese victory. And it is doable.

The addition of these two fighters help Japan immensely...mainly because Japan under estimated how much fighter production they were going to need.




Yeah I agree I was a bit in hurry of my former post, cause I had read the term "bad boy" so often from John, got tired of it somehow haha. Yes, for IJ these are bad boys you both are right. Even more so in 43 the Jack as CAP fighter - you need to check climb rates for CAP it is pretty important, if your plane is to slow and can not climb fast to engage bombers, there is no value for CAP right ? And Jack and Tojo are the 2 earlier planes which suit this role...George ... not so much, more escort. It has worse climb and SR3 (imho ofc and I am still newbie in PBM but noted already in 2 games big difference to AI)

As an anecdote, my 1st game was allied vs. AI, I can remember (only) 2 things that caused my more serious concern, it was early on Tojos and late war Kamis. But P47 cleaned the floor ofc, but Kamis sometimes got through i remember that

@ John, pls speed of Ki100(1) plus your Jack (any) and Tojo (IIc 4xHMG) pool/prod ?

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 4/21/2017 3:22:35 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3915
RE: July 1944 - 4/22/2017 1:57:26 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Like Professor Lowpe stated, you need faster fighters with 20mm or 30mm cannons. The Tony is slightly faster, but unless its diving, it will not catch the B-29s too often.

You got behind in quality air production and you are paying the price, John.



Behind in quality fighters? Frank in months early. Sam in months early. Now Frank-B and Tony-100 SIX or so months early.

Biggest mistake was scale of production. This is being corrected and once these two bad boys enter the production line we should be able to fill everyone out and cause some serious bellyache for the Allied bombing campaign. It is this area scale and scope of what is needed, as said earlier, that my biggest learning curve has been. In so many ways I feel like a 1st time player exploring this end game side of AE.



I think Michael is correct here. You really should have the Frank R at this point; you will get the Frank B but in this mod I believe it is a direct upgrade from Frank A. That doesn't decrease its value any, and I am really looking forward to seeing how it performs.

I don't think you will be seeing the Frank R in this game, and it really is the only Army sweeper you were likely to get.

It is not the end of the world, but does put more pressure on some Navy fighters and removes a tool from your box.




< Message edited by Lowpe -- 4/22/2017 1:58:12 PM >

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 3916
RE: July 1944 - 4/22/2017 4:16:32 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


and sorry if "dream world" was over the top.


Hans, it isn't over the top, for goodness sake.

And JFB's do live in a dream world anyhow.



In MY 'dream world' the sun is ALWAYS RISING in a Red-and-White sunburst!

BANZAI!


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3917
RE: July 1944 - 4/22/2017 4:20:03 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alpha77

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

John is absolutely correct....the Ki100-I and the Frank B are the two best Army bomber killers that Japan is ever likely to see in a game. They are bad boys. It is just too bad Japan isn't also adding the Frank R.

If I could trade 3000 Ki100I and Franks to destroy 1000 Jugs prior to 1945, well then that would be a great Japanese victory. And it is doable.

The addition of these two fighters help Japan immensely...mainly because Japan under estimated how much fighter production they were going to need.




Yeah I agree I was a bit in hurry of my former post, cause I had read the term "bad boy" so often from John, got tired of it somehow haha. Yes, for IJ these are bad boys you both are right. Even more so in 43 the Jack as CAP fighter - you need to check climb rates for CAP it is pretty important, if your plane is to slow and can not climb fast to engage bombers, there is no value for CAP right ? And Jack and Tojo are the 2 earlier planes which suit this role...George ... not so much, more escort. It has worse climb and SR3 (imho ofc and I am still newbie in PBM but noted already in 2 games big difference to AI)

As an anecdote, my 1st game was allied vs. AI, I can remember (only) 2 things that caused my more serious concern, it was early on Tojos and late war Kamis. But P47 cleaned the floor ofc, but Kamis sometimes got through i remember that

@ John, pls speed of Ki100(1) plus your Jack (any) and Tojo (IIc 4xHMG) pool/prod ?


There are no Jacks in this game. The ZERO designer sticks to the ZERO airframe the whole war. This is how we explain the various upgrade paths and quicker development of follow-on A6 designs.

I LOVE the Jack and have often thought of creating a Mod where the ZERO development stops at the M2 and everything pours into bringing the so-so version of Jack and George. That would be an interesting 'what if.'


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Alpha77)
Post #: 3918
RE: July 1944 - 4/22/2017 4:21:47 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Dan is gone for the weekend.

I ran the July 4th turn and did not send it back to him. Let me Post a screenshot of a strike at the 1.0x10^6 with its INITIAL CAP up and before these numbers more then DOUBLED:





Attachment (1)

_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 3919
RE: July 1944 - 4/22/2017 8:44:23 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Here is the combat report of the CAP over his Fleet:





Attachment (1)

_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 3920
RE: July 1944 - 4/22/2017 9:43:38 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		July 4, 1944

Luganville has been a pretty decent area for Japan over the last two months. As alluded to earlier, Dan landed without near enough and then my Ndeni planes smashed two separate TFs trying to bring troops/supply into the New Zealand perimeter.

Since I cannot fight what has been detailed above, we adopted a spirit of 'hit them where they ain't!' We want a cheap naval victory that yields a good haul of Victory Points. This led the High Command to making a decision that has been kept, more-or-less, secret for the last several weeks.

Dan has seen Japanese CVs east of the Philippines, in the Marianas, and all throughout the DEI. Just today four CVs engaged north of Miri. This has all been very purposeful. The goal is to make Dan THINK all of Japan's flattops are accounted for. After all, only an idiot would split his CVs in mid-1944. RIGHT??

Very quietly a Carrier TF slips SE and arrives at Tulagi undetected. It refuels on the last of the fuel stationed there (for a possibility like this) and disbands into the Port. No recon or air search picks up on it at all. Dan goes quiet in the area so I load three PC/PG with supplies and send them to Luganville. They arrive, are seen, unload, and depart.

No reaction by the enemy.

OK.

Send down the modern BC Ikoma and 4 DDs to bombard the New Zealanders present there. I decide to take a major risk and dangle Ikoma out as bait. I order it to bombard and 'remain.' Dan spots it coming SE, it bombards the base, and, as planned, remains. Sure enough, he reacts and sends his 3-4 CVE north from Suva. His BB Pennsylvania TF is just behind the Jeep CVEs.

Four small strikes hit the Ikoma: 17 SBD, 14 F and 14 DB, 15 F, 17 SBD, and 7 Avengers, and then 15 F, 13 SBD, and 6 Avengers. Watching the strikes is terrifying as I truly hope Ikoma and her Captain are up to the task. HE is! The little TF's AA claims 6 DB and 2 AV in exchange for 7 1,000lb bombs and NO TT hits. NICE! Ikoma is at 26 SYS, 1 FLOT, and 6 ENG--NONE is major damage. A DD takes a pair of bombs but is in remarkably good shape.

Enemy SPOTTED!

Form up CVs Soryu, Hiryu, Shokaku and CVL Ibuki. Order a FULL SPEED sprint to arrive at a point 1 Hex SE of Luganville. Order reaction to maximum range of 6. For once we WANT to move if the enemy is in range tomorrow. Over 260 planes are ready to fly tomorrow...

Ndeni prepares for action as well!





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by John 3rd -- 4/22/2017 9:48:47 PM >

_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 3921
RE: July 1944 - 4/22/2017 9:47:59 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Should add that I sent Dan the following message with the CR and 001:

Sorry. The turn took FOREVER and I give up on any form of bombardment in any game EVER again…

We'll see if this makes him stay and try to finish the job on poor, helpless damaged Ikoma...

BANZAI!


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 3922
RE: July 1944 - 4/22/2017 11:15:45 PM   
Bearcat2

 

Posts: 577
Joined: 2/14/2004
Status: offline 		How big is the airfield at Efate and what does he have there?

_____________________________

"After eight years as President I have only two regrets: that I have not shot Henry Clay or hanged John C. Calhoun."--1837

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 3923
RE: July 1944 - 4/23/2017 12:15:42 AM   
adarbrauner

 

Posts: 1496
Joined: 11/3/2016
From: Zichron Yaaqov, Israel; Before, Treviso, Italy
Status: offline 		Just a question, why did you send 55 Jills to sacrifice (instead of, say 12)?

The action off the Ebrides looks exciting, thumbs crossed but:

where are the cap traps for Dan's main fleet south of formosa? Subs attacks?

(in reply to Bearcat2)
Post #: 3924
RE: July 1944 - 4/23/2017 12:54:36 AM   
CaptHaggard

 

Posts: 191
Joined: 3/8/2016
From: Sonoma, CA
Status: offline 		J3—

The narrative in #3921 is truly compelling... on the edge... awaiting events...

Good luck! Cheers!


(in reply to adarbrauner)
Post #: 3925
RE: July 1944 - 4/23/2017 1:01:08 AM   
Alpha77

 

Posts: 2116
Joined: 9/24/2010
Status: offline 		It may be, however not sure if this area is too much a "sideshow" by now, perhaps these are only 2-3 CVEs or so... yup good if they can be get... but on the price (perhaps) neglecting the more important areas.

John use biggest IJA fighter units stuff them with older Tojos (of the IIc version older makes no sense anymore) try to guess or recon his next base target, send 300 fighters in :) Quantity has quality on its own. If you lose half of them not so big deal, but lets see what they can bring down with them. 4xHMG still can shoot down any Allied fighter as well 1-2e bombers

You can set Tojos lower (they have good climb) and throw in some vh flying other planes (even ZeroM5 if enough of them), lets hope not too many Allies read here and now know the IJ best weapons. so psssst, lets better be quiet, for OP sec. You need bit of luck with weather and bad coordination for the enemy and his raid may be fragmented.. what a feast we will have.

But lets hope you op does not drop the game after half his force is shot down :) Allies do not like huge losses, they may throw the towel (like mine did, even if he said, no time to play anymore. I am not to blame I was only defending vs. the imperialists )

< Message edited by Alpha77 -- 4/23/2017 1:17:18 AM >

(in reply to CaptHaggard)
Post #: 3926
RE: July 1944 - 4/23/2017 1:02:52 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termite2

How big is the airfield at Efate and what does he have there?


Lvl-3 and about 25 planes.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Bearcat2)
Post #: 3927
RE: July 1944 - 4/23/2017 3:44:45 AM   
crsutton


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

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Here is the combat report of the CAP over his Fleet:






Yeah, but how many carriers did you sink?

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 3928
RE: July 1944 - 4/23/2017 4:25:02 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Ahhhhhhhhh...does that question really deserve an answer????

ZERO!

No runs. No Hits. No Errors.


< Message edited by John 3rd -- 4/23/2017 2:55:10 PM >

_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 3929
RE: July 1944 - 4/23/2017 4:28:18 AM   
BillBrown


Posts: 2335
Joined: 6/15/2002
Status: offline 		But you shot down an F4F-4 Wildcat.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 3930
Page:   <<   < prev  129 130 [131] 132 133   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: July 1944 Page: <<   < prev  129 130 [131] 132 133   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

0.750