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: Kane and Unable ;]

 
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: Kane and Unable ;] Page: <<   < prev  9 10 [11] 12 13   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/8/2017 8:36:25 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline 		September 21, 1944

The revealed map shows a lot of action going on. MrKane is not going to disappoint me as his carriers are southeast of Shikuka already.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 301
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/8/2017 8:41:47 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline 		I set some mine traps out (see above) and a couple destroyers and a heavy cruiser wandered into them. At worst this will make him take a few more hexes to come and go for replenisment until he can get rid of them.

MrKane has put more than a few of my ships into the yards due to his expert use of minefields.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 302
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/8/2017 8:52:17 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline 		Over 500AA guns at Shikuka. Hopefully I will have nearly 800 mines out in front after this turn.

MrKane is closing fast and I met my goal of 1/2 million supply so I am going to take almost all of the fleet and jhook up northeast 6 hexes (to the hex with the amphib fleets in it) with an attack set for 30% CAP at 15,000 feet max range 6 hexes with all the other aircraft to attack.

If MrKane comes up hot and fast we may clash this next turn. After the last 2 disastrous carrier encounters I am sort of gunshy. I verified multiple times that my fighter groups do not have anything as their target and hopefully that resolves the issue of no protection for my attack(s).






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Wargmr -- 7/8/2017 8:53:50 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 303
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/8/2017 9:04:50 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline 		MrKane has diminished my STF ammunition by sending a lot of fluff after me






Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 304
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/8/2017 9:05:51 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline 		This turn I intend to do the same back by breaking off 4-5 Destroyer and DE STF's and shotgunning them out in front of Shikuka.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 305
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/8/2017 10:50:18 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline 		So, after that whole setup, the scientific naval graph and everything... Zip, Zero, Nada in the air war.

Dont know if the mine fields spooked MrKane or he never planned on moving further into the bay. On the plus side, the mine fields have done better than I could have hoped. I blame this on my pathetic use of them during the game causing MrKane to let his guard slip a bit.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 306
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/9/2017 1:01:18 AM   
Bif1961


Posts: 2014
Joined: 6/26/2008
From: Phenix City, Alabama
Status: offline 		Do you have HRs against using hundreds of empty ships to soak up a surface or air attacks? It seems a little gamey to me, unless you are playing unlimited HRs. I have HRs for limited PT boats per harbor because some have used dozens of PT boats to soak up ammo and op points of bombardment TFs because the game system allows/works that way. Remember those vessels, though possible not needed are crewed by real people and assigning them death missions is not what the Allies would do at this point of the war. I do give the Japanese more latitude because as the war got desperate for them they did start suicide operations below, on above the surface.

< Message edited by Bif1961 -- 7/9/2017 1:12:35 AM >

(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 307
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/9/2017 1:46:31 AM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bif1961

Do you have HRs against using hundreds of empty ships to soak up a surface or air attacks? It seems a little gamey to me, unless you are playing unlimited HRs. I have HRs for limited PT boats per harbor because some have used dozens of PT boats to soak up ammo and op points of bombardment TFs because the game system allows/works that way. Remember those vessels, though possible not needed are crewed by real people and assigning them death missions is not what the Allies would do at this point of the war. I do give the Japanese more latitude because as the war got desperate for them they did start suicide operations below, on above the surface.


MrKane purposely allowed certain allied units to remain in his Kamikaze zone so he got them activated on January 1, 1944 even though I was nowhere near his activation lines.

We are not playing a simulation, we are playing a war game :]

If there was an HR against it I would certainly follow it.


_____________________________


(in reply to Bif1961)
Post #: 308
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/9/2017 11:29:32 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Wargmr

September 21, 1944

The revealed map shows a lot of action going on. MrKane is not going to disappoint me as his carriers are southeast of Shikuka already.

Yeah, but 4 days is too long a delay. You are really in the drivers seat here. Gonna be interesting to watch.



_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 309
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/9/2017 1:48:55 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Wargmr

September 21, 1944

The revealed map shows a lot of action going on. MrKane is not going to disappoint me as his carriers are southeast of Shikuka already.

Yeah, but 4 days is too long a delay. You are really in the drivers seat here. Gonna be interesting to watch.




To be fair, I was ready to jump off near Davao when we tangled last time. I lost 450 dive bombers and torpedo bombers because of again having my fighters set to a target (not sure why that should matter). However, it did not fundamentally affect my ability to defend the transports.

Less than 2 weeks later those same carriers participated in an action off of Shikuka.

MrKane lost 2 days because my carriers went east immediately after a disastrous encounter with him and he didnt get any search lock on me due to weather and/or not looking where he did not expect me to go.

His fundamental flaw was not having a better force at Shikuka although honestly, there is not much a Japanese player can do in late 44 because the allies can simply go where they are not. Shikuka is going to hurt because I can hit him in the breadbasket in Asia. It is going to hurt him 2 ways, in his production and in his need to keep his bases covered by fighter CAP aircraft which will run down his supply. I saw his sorties drop down to around 6K for a while but the last few days they have been up over 9K.

I dont like to strat bomb for some silly reason. Not sure what to do in this game.

Havent sent out the B-29's yet, building a good reserve and will be strat bombing within 30 days once I have built up Shikuka.

_____________________________


(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 310
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/9/2017 7:24:33 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline 		Tried to steal Ketoi-Jima on the cheap because I thought it was uninhabited.

Oops. Going to unload 4 bombardment task forces and the 2EB's I have at Shikuka and pray it does enough to stop him from killing my Naval Base.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 311
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/10/2017 2:09:39 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline 		Two days of ground attacks from Shikuka and a full on raid from the carriers never materialized due to mistakes and/or weather. The base force still managed to wrest the base from the Japanese unit due to a massive bombardment attack.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 312
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/10/2017 2:21:48 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline 		Finally managed to put a few strategic points on the scoreboard a few days ago. I owe him plenty :]






Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 313
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/14/2017 2:15:52 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline 		October 1944

Ketoi-Jima has been secured. Onnekotan-Jima was pounded by bombardment forces and aircraft when those groups sailed to rearm at Attu island. The 75th infantry brigade and the 26th mixed infantry brigade got up over 100AV each but just got hit with 800 bombers from the returning carriers. AV showed 0 on bombardment so I am going to hit them by air again this turn and have my division attack. It should roll the base over to me.

MrKane just ran his first bombardment force against shikuka. He had a cruiser group hit it and caused some good damage while getting 2 destroyers hit by mines. It looks like the field will be down for about 4 days or so before I can continue to build up the airfield. With the current engineers that will take 8 days to lvl 8.

A large amount of engineers are converging on my carrier TF and should arrive within a week. They will be escorted to Shikuka to add to the building. Once the base goes lvl 9 it is going to get ugly in the air.






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Wargmr -- 7/14/2017 2:20:37 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 314
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/14/2017 6:40:01 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline 		Single bases are always very vulnerable to shutdown by bombardment. You may have aircraft set to Naval Attack and lots of search aircraft but a couple of days of bad weather and the enemy bombardment TFs might get to your base and shut it down.
It is good that you have Ketoi Jima already, but it is a little far away to support Shikuka. Any chance you can take Toyohara? Maybe drop in all your Chindits and Para units?

_____________________________

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 Mike McCreery)
Post #: 315
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/14/2017 10:25:11 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Single bases are always very vulnerable to shutdown by bombardment. You may have aircraft set to Naval Attack and lots of search aircraft but a couple of days of bad weather and the enemy bombardment TFs might get to your base and shut it down.
It is good that you have Ketoi Jima already, but it is a little far away to support Shikuka. Any chance you can take Toyohara? Maybe drop in all your Chindits and Para units?


He has 8 units and 32,000 troops there. It isnt going to be easy to take it. Going to go in the land route once I throw another 1000 AV on Shikuka for defense.


_____________________________


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 316
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/16/2017 10:32:24 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline 		October 1944

MrKane surprises me by bailing out of both Arythia and Bangkok at the same time. I was attempting to encircle it prior to assault. He decided it was not worth losing the troops apparently.

It has me a little freaked out TBH. I am going to have to take counter measures to defend against those troops now being free to move around. I am afraid for the Phillipines right now although a force that large could contest Java or other areas.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 317
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/17/2017 5:48:25 AM   
obvert


Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline 		Any chance to hit hem in strat mode at Pnom Penh?

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 318
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/19/2017 12:10:50 AM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline 		Late October 1944

There are 6 divisions trapped on Java that have been there a long time. 2 are stuck at Malang, 2 are at Loemdjang, 1 is at Madioen and one is at Bandoeng. I am currently pounding the crap out of Malang along with battleship bombardments to elminate that threat.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 319
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/19/2017 12:14:10 AM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline 		In addition to pounding it with hundreds of bombers at 10K I have this little beastie helping me out.

Forts were at 4 when he first attacked and each of 2 attacks has dropped the forts each time. Going in for a 3rd assault. His raw AV is down below 650 and I am cycling divisions in and out for the assaults keeping below the stack limit.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 320
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/19/2017 12:29:01 AM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline 		There are at least 2 divisions trapped in Northeast Thailand. MrKane evacuated this area and seems to be strat moving his troops, likely to well defended positions. I am racing to block the rail line near Vinh and strat moving the bulk of my army to the area to attempt to get to Hanoi/Haiphong.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 321
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/19/2017 12:34:07 AM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline 		Shikuka gained over 1800 engineers and last turn went up 14% from lvl 8-9. Starting to swing a good portion of the American air arm toward the base.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 322
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/19/2017 6:20:14 AM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline 		I thought there was a limit of 500 engineers working on one base?
Do you have any observations as you added units that adding more than 500 engineers increased building?

_____________________________

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 Mike McCreery)
Post #: 323
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/19/2017 10:12:09 AM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

I thought there was a limit of 500 engineers working on one base?
Do you have any observations as you added units that adding more than 500 engineers increased building?


The rate of gain with the equivalent of 600 engineers was 8-9% per day building from lvl 7-8. I seemed to gain nearly 20% 2 turns ago from lvl 8-9 and 14% from lvl 8-9 last turn.

I would say there is a significant gain in airfield building. My counts include engineering vehicles if that makes a difference. I have the equivalent of 500 * 3 = 1500 engineering points in vehicles.

_____________________________


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 324
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/19/2017 1:49:33 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline 		There was a study done some years ago, the number of engr's that will work increases with the size of the base.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 325
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/19/2017 3:24:43 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline 		Shikuka gains 18% towards lvl 9 airbase at 69%. MrKane moves what appear to be a bombardment force, a supply/troop convoy and a STF that may be cover or it may be another bombardment force to Toyohara.

I expect him to bombard next turn. The first time he bombarded 2 of his destroyers were hit by mines. The second time he bombarded 2 of his heavy cruisers plus a destroyer hit mines. I have reinforced Shikuka with another 600 mines for a total of just over 1800. In addition I have deployed 3 patrol boat task forces of 8 ships each in the harbor.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 326
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/19/2017 3:30:08 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline 		My carrier and STF groups are moving west across the Philippine sea. My spider sense is screaming :} MrKane has not once messed with any of the groups that landed on Luzon. It is too quiet.

I lack serious armor on the island and feel vunerable, particularly at legaspi. Troops are airlanding and the majority of my naval forces can reach there in 3 turns.

Meanwhile, a combat STF just showed up moving east toward Manila and there is a lot of activity around Cam Rahn Bay.

Surprisingly I hit a convoy southeast of Iwo Jima. Either MrKane thought I turned the other way or he is trying to distract me at the moment. I am going to stay on course, there are a few ships left but they are not worth the diversion.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Wargmr -- 7/19/2017 3:33:28 PM >

_____________________________


(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 327
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/20/2017 12:48:02 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline 		Expected bombardments did not arrive, base goes to 86% toward lvl 9. I plan on moving the majority of the US air wing into Shikuka over the next few weeks.

To get a historical win I will need to get somewhere in the range of 80,000 victory points mostly through strat bombing within the next 9 month.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 328
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/20/2017 1:19:49 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Wargmr

To get a historical win I will need to get somewhere in the range of 80,000 victory points mostly through strat bombing within the next 9 month.



you should be able to get far more than that ...

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 329
RE: Kane and Unable ;] - 7/21/2017 2:07:56 AM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline 		Indochina.

MrKane is giving up a lot of territory. I managed to get a unit on the rail line southwest of Vinh. 2 more days and the unit will be blocking the road to Vinh and the rail line to Vinh. I only see 1 unit of regiment/brigade strength there.

If I can secure Vinh it means that 2000+ av will be moving into China pretty quickly.

There are no bases that are well developed along the east indochina coast. It does not have any real point value. Cam Ranh Bay has a port of 9 but only airfield of 4.

At least 2300 AV is moving south toward Saigon.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Wargmr -- 7/21/2017 2:09:17 AM >

_____________________________


(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 330
Page:   <<   < prev  9 10 [11] 12 13   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Kane and Unable ;] Page: <<   < prev  9 10 [11] 12 13   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