RE: July 1944

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 143 144 [145] 146 147 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: July 1944 - 5/20/2017 3:36:09 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Damn. HOW did your opponent gain 187,563 VP??!! That is a staggering number...

60K strategic VP gained. He bombed resources too, and got points for them....my air force pretty much was shot by June/July of 44...it was 7 months of daily shore bombardments by 10+ battleships and heavy bombing.

He had half of Japan.

I'll hang my head in shame for asking. WOW! Those are some scary numbers...

I didn't realize at the time you got victory points for resources, so he had some great milk runs.

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 4321

August 1944 - 5/20/2017 3:38:42 PM

John 3rd

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

Here are aerial losses this day. I ambushed a group of 36 SBD flying all by their little lonesome. The shipping strike cost me about 50 planes but certainly worked out nicely:

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 #: 4322

RE: August 1944 - 5/20/2017 3:41:49 PM

John 3rd

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

If you look at that screenshot above you'll see the concentration of SS near my carriers at Soerabaja. My Jills and Judys are having a field day blasting enemy subs. Have formed three ASW TF that are pretty formidable and they are starting to make attacks every day. Just today the Americans lost the USS Parche and Sea Rover. Let them stay for several more days! We'll beat on them some more and then move out towards Balikpapan...

_____________________________

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 #: 4323

RE: August 1944 - 5/20/2017 3:49:13 PM

John 3rd

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

Here is a telling screen on Production. Someone had asked for this to see what I've gone thru to this point in the war. Think this answers that question. As noted by several about 3-4 months ago I have issues with some of my engine production. Have tried to correct this but it is too little, too late. We'll muddle forward with what we have.

Just couldn't imagine the scale and scope of what I needed to fight this late in the war. We'll do much better in my next match.

On the BRIGHT side I crossed 900,000 stored HI. The goal is to hit 1,000,000.

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 #: 4324

RE: August 1944 - 5/20/2017 3:56:41 PM

John 3rd

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

Those five ships sunk keep the Allies from having the lead as we roll new month:

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 #: 4325

RE: July 1944 - 5/20/2017 4:50:29 PM

AcePylut

Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

What the HECK is an LSI(L)?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landing_ship,_infantry

_____________________________

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 4326

RE: July 1944 - 5/20/2017 5:33:35 PM

crsutton

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: AcePylut

There's always a trick - and if the victory is dependent on losing carriers, and I'm playing as US, my CV's aren't leaving an off-map base until late '43 at best, when they are all fully stocked with Hellcats and I have an overwhelming advantage.... you will certainly never ever see them in '42... and that would detract from the game.

VP's are the way to go. It is what it is.

Yes, but that is conceding a big time advantage to the Japanese allowing the accumulation of resources and building of defensive positions. I don't think you would make Tokyo vs a good opponent. Just my two cents.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to AcePylut)

Post #: 4327

RE: July 1944 - 5/20/2017 5:51:37 PM

crsutton

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

For me it is the contest. The head-to-head side of the game. I do sooooo love it.

The Allied player does not fundamentally understand (at least many of them) that FIGHTING in 1942 might lead to the occasional disaster but ANYTHING Japanese sunk during these fights CANNOT be replaced. It is better to fight and lose ships while bleeding the Japanese every step of the way. Makes for an exciting game and tests the Japanese player to always be on their toes.

That VP total of mine includes the disastrous Sumatra adventure where Dan lost dozens of ships and an ENTIRE Field Army of over 100,000 men who became POWs. Add to that the early-44 disaster landing at the Celebes where another 50,000 Allied troops entered the Japanese POW camps. Japan has 65,000 VPs! By any measure ALL the Allied Generals and Admirals would have been fired for their handling of the war to this point. I never understand how a player can just 'leave' troops or operations that have gone bad. It could never have happened IRL but, since this is a game, can happen here.

What about other long-term players? JFB or AFB--Where did you end up in your games with VPs and/or stories of your campaigns?

Those who have been reading my post over the years know that I have only one mantra for the Allied player. Don't fret about losses in 1942 but don't lose your carriers. That does not mean I don't advocate using them in 1942. I have one full campaign under my belt (August 1945) with my current one just entering 1944. My opponent Viberpol is a highly skilled Japanese player. (John might remember him

) My first campaign was a bit conservative with me focusing on the Japanese oil assets. It actually turned out to be a good plan as it was a scen 2 game and Ark simply overproduced himself out of business. He surrendered on the day of Russian activation not because he did not have sufficient force but had almost completely run out of supply and fuel. I had lost about 8 fleet and CVLs but had pretty much negated his navy. I would have to say that he won every carrier fight on a tactical level but attrition just did him in. And, there was the the dark day of the dog when he won a tactical carrier fight with both carrier forces heavily wounded but had his injured fleet stumble into my waiting subs. In one of the most amazing days of my sub career I saw about 10 successful sub attacks on his retreating capital ships and sent a number to the bottom.

My current game is a Dababes game and it is a lot of fun. We both are better at the game but Ark has had to get used to a smaller force pool. He probably is doing a better job of running his economy though.

I have been much more aggressive in this campaign. This really is from reading Dan's AARs over the years. I put up a fight since day one losing a lot more ships but doing a good job of keeping Ark off balance.

I never really even look at VP. I will know when it is over if I won or lost. I told him that I considered our first match a draw since I did not really better the Allies historical outcome.

I think the Allied player should use his carriers in 1942 and in a very aggressive manner. However, I never look for a fight that I don't think I can win. But if I had to take Tokyo to win, I can assure you that I would be using all of my forces in 1942 for that purpose.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 4328

RE: July 1944 - 5/20/2017 6:01:53 PM

crsutton

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: AcePylut

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anachro

quote:

ORIGINAL: AcePylut

I'm playing as US, my CV's aren't leaving an off-map base until late '43 at best, when they are all fully stocked with Hellcats and I have an overwhelming advantage.... you will certainly never ever see them in '42...

Hm.

Don't forget the qualifier : "...if the victory is dependent on losing carriers...".

My carriers are on the map, and closer than you think. :D

No, it is entirely dependent on taking Tokyo. If you lose a lot of carriers along the way then the best you can achieve is a draw. But you still have to take Tokyo or you lose. Just how many Allied players have pulled that off? I have seen enough to know that even a half ass Allied player can pull off a minor in VP fairly easy. The problem with VP is the game was never fully play tested because such a massive game just made it impossible. And I don't think many players find the VP formula balanced.

The benefit to my proposal is that games will go deeper and we will see more late war ordnance. The unrealistic auto victory grab which usually ends in a termination of the game will go away and the Japanese player will actually feel like he can use his air arm and fleet in a historical manner as he would not be worried about losing them.

BTW, hiding the Hermes and using her for non-fleet purposes might not necessarily be a bad idea.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to AcePylut)

Post #: 4329

RE: July 1944 - 5/20/2017 7:24:54 PM

Elessar2

Posts: 883
Joined: 11/30/2016
Status: offline

quote:

Batavia
Repairing in Port:
BB Musashi--SYS 42, FLOT 2, and ENG 4--None of this major damage. Everything is repairing at a point a day.

What happened to the Yamato? I tried to search in this thread thanks to Google advanced search, could not locate the AAR where she bit the dust...

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 4330

RE: July 1944 - 5/20/2017 10:13:39 PM

Bif1961

Posts: 2014
Joined: 6/26/2008
From: Phenix City, Alabama
Status: offline

I think we are losing sight, that historically the Allies still a year left to continue to gain VPs and take them away from Japan. To be tied by this time is good for the Allies and he is not losing by a far shot. He might garner 70-80,000 points in the next 12 months if the game lasts that long and John might lose 20-30 more so it might be by 1 August 45 Canoerebel is up 3-1 or more. In other words it is too early to tell where the VPs will be in the next year given how far he has come by now it will take a turn of fortune to reverse the steady gaining of VPs.

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 4331

RE: July 1944 - 5/21/2017 12:21:04 AM

John 3rd

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

Bif is spot-on with his observation.

The Yamato was sunk along with Nagato while hanging up on a bombardment run heading for one of the New Guinea ports. The whole bombardment mission hanging up has been a bane of my existence in this game. I lost Yamato and Nagato as well as 4 CAs over in Sumatra. Have had that happen one or two other times resulting in heavy damage to the workhorses of the fleet. This is an area that I've never had an issue with before but this game has been insane in watching it happen.

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to Bif1961)

Post #: 4332

RE: July 1944 - 5/21/2017 1:18:18 AM

Lowpe

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

3-1 in 1944; 2-1 in 1945 for AutoVic...

IF the Allies break the Japanese fighter production, well then I think they can get 60,000 strategic vp by bombing in 3 months or even less, as they probably will have gotten quite a few VP from destroying the production in the first place.

Of course all this supposes the Allies go big into strategic bombing...which certainly hasn't been the case the entire game to the best of my knowledge. I think there has only been a few shipyard attacks?

Every Allied player is different...Wargamr beat NJP with almost 0 strategic bombing and by invading Honshu. There are a lot of victory paths open to the Allies, and a lot of it depends upon what they enjoy.

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 4333

RE: July 1944 - 5/21/2017 3:12:40 AM

John 3rd

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

Been thinking that I have a lot more flexibility with Kido Butai now that I am in the DEI. Everyone is fully fueled and I have my AOs fully loaded. Presently that means about 60,000 extra fuel. Sort of opens up my thinking some. Have got several fresh ideas currently percolating.

We plan to open ALL forms of night attack beginning August 15th. Think I am going to run some supply into Mindanao to get those bases fully functional and do some recon of Manila, Legaspi, Naga, etc...looking for those multiple hundreds of ships disbanded in Port.

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 4334

August 1944 - 5/21/2017 5:32:13 PM

John 3rd

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

Well...it had to happen. The Allies crossed over the Victory Point tally on August 2, 1944. Just means that I need to go get me SOME!

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 4335

RE: August 1944 - 5/22/2017 1:29:15 AM

Anachro

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

What are your plans for KB in the medium-term?

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 4336

RE: August 1944 - 5/22/2017 2:23:17 AM

John 3rd

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

Raise some HELL!

He has invaded Ternate. I need that base for moving my convoy thru. A group of AKs have loaded an Inf Brigade at Balikpapan, along with 10,000 supply, and will depart tomorrow (Aug 3rd) for this base. The Kido Butai moved away from Soerabaja on the current turn and is moving to Balikpapan. A strong set of STF will defend the convoy as well as embedding a BC or two into the convoy. We'll fix it so that base is solidly Japan and maybe drive those troops out!

As that is happening another convoy carrying about 10,000 supply will go to Davao. I want Davao, Cagayan, et al. operational for NIGHT Bombing purposes.

Once fully engaged the TKs will go right down the middle between Ternate and Davao heading for the Marianas and then home.

Boela is a big, ripe plum that begs to be bombarded. Will probably do that as well.

I am planning to totally disrupt his supply system.

If he moves south with the 1.0x10^6 then that takes pressure off the north and I can take advantage of that...

< Message edited by John 3rd -- 5/22/2017 2:24:15 AM >

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to Anachro)

Post #: 4337

August 1944 - 5/22/2017 7:17:05 AM

John 3rd

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

August 2, 1944

It has been an excellent war for the Japanese sub arm. Though numbers have not been updated recently, the Allies are feeling the sting of Japanese TTs nearly every turn presently. The sub arm is down to about 40 boats but they are doing quite well.

August 2nd
We have two misses this day with an AM missed on the West Coast and a YMS missed near Marcus.
I-158 SINKS LST-471 with 2 TT near Sitkinak Isle
I-202 probably sinks CL Biloxi with a TT hit followed by a magazine explosion just off Siargao, Phil.

NICE!

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 4338

RE: August 1944 - 5/22/2017 7:21:45 AM

John 3rd

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

The Kaigun moves out. CV TFs and STFs heading for Balikpapan and they are BLASTING Allied subs. TWO sets of sub sinking sounds this turn.

A cargo TF heads for Davao and the reinforcement TF moves towards Ternate.

Nearly 50 Emily/Mavis are flying out of Peleliu and Babeldoap watching for any dangerous Allied moves.

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 #: 4339

RE: August 1944 - 5/22/2017 7:25:08 AM

John 3rd

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

Though the Allies continue to slowly gain the upper hand in the Battle Over Formosa, we have a pretty normal day in ATA:

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 #: 4340

RE: August 1944 - 5/22/2017 8:05:45 AM

adarbrauner

Posts: 1496
Joined: 11/3/2016
From: Zichron Yaaqov, Israel; Before, Treviso, Italy
Status: offline

Yes but I think you're committing a mistake in not addressing the Woochow invasion more energetically and aggressively, and quick, the Luzon screenplay is going to repeat itself, but maybe that's what you want.

The units you wrote above mobilized for Woochow theatre are not sufficient, you need much more and fast, if you really wish to stop cold the invasion from expanding and become out of control, thing that maybe you're not inclined to at this point though...

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 4341

RE: August 1944 - 5/22/2017 2:33:54 PM

Chickenboy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Though the Allies continue to slowly gain the upper hand in the Battle Over Formosa, we have a pretty normal day in ATA:

Did you retake the VP lead?

_____________________________

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 4342

RE: August 1944 - 5/22/2017 3:03:52 PM

John 3rd

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: adarbrauner

Yes but I think you're committing a mistake in not addressing the Woochow invasion more energetically and aggressively, and quick, the Luzon screenplay is going to repeat itself, but maybe that's what you want.

The units you wrote above mobilized for Woochow theatre are not sufficient, you need much more and fast, if you really wish to stop cold the invasion from expanding and become out of control, thing that maybe you're not inclined to at this point though...

EVERYTHING that is available to move is moving. Just started loading an ID and three Brigades at Tokyo and am sending them to Shanghai. Have another convoy carrying yet another load of troops from the Central/South Pacific heading there as well.

We're probing this turn to see how far he has advanced moving north from Woochow. Am trying to get enough troops to Amoy to stop his westward movement.

< Message edited by John 3rd -- 5/22/2017 3:04:51 PM >

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to adarbrauner)

Post #: 4343

RE: August 1944 - 5/22/2017 3:04:20 PM

John 3rd

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Though the Allies continue to slowly gain the upper hand in the Battle Over Formosa, we have a pretty normal day in ATA:

Did you retake the VP lead?

No. Biloxi is not reported as sunk.

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 4344

RE: August 1944 - 5/22/2017 3:08:44 PM

John 3rd

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

John (my eldest) and I went to see the new Alien film last night. Though it has gotten bad reviews, I thought the film was OK. Not many in the audience could say they were there to see the original in 1978 in the theatres! Anyway, the kid really liked it and will be talking to all his buddies at school tomorrow regarding 'his' review of the movie.

_____________________________

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 #: 4345

RE: August 1944 - 5/22/2017 3:28:49 PM

Chickenboy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
We're probing this turn to see how far he has advanced moving north from Woochow. Am trying to get enough troops to Amoy to stop his westward movement.

I think recon flights on and around Woochow are pretty important to know what you're really up against in this landing. Can you please post any recon mouseovers with the relevant information? Also, the probe (either via bombardment or ground combat) will be interesting to see what's involved.

< Message edited by Chickenboy -- 5/22/2017 3:29:36 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 4346

RE: August 1944 - 5/22/2017 3:37:16 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

EVERYTHING that is available to move is moving. Just started loading an ID and three Brigades at Tokyo and am sending them to Shanghai.

Bold...don't forget the safer rail network from Korea. Also uses less fuel.

Amoy clear terrain?

Another very good day in the air at Formosa...that air battle seems to be quite good for Japan. Can't believe how well you are doing there.

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 4347

RE: August 1944 - 5/22/2017 4:06:12 PM

John 3rd

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

Had to do this last turn FAST and am headed to work.

Will do on the mouseovers.

Formosa took a turn this last turn in that he bombarded all Ports/AF from shore. That hurt a bit and my three CD units hardly did a thing. Hmmm...

GREAT note on the transport using Korea. LIKE IT!

Headed for work.

_____________________________

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

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

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 4348

RE: August 1944 - 5/22/2017 6:51:51 PM

Andav

Posts: 474
Joined: 5/8/2007
Status: offline

Anyone else besides me worried by the Vehicle Number? Lowpe? Lowpe? Anyone?

Wa