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 81 82 [83] 84 85 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/7/2017 9:33:46 PM

ashkpa

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

I'm Back. Sorry for the long delay, but work life was more full than expected in semi-retirement.
Three post coming with the results of the air-air and the ground strikes over Lisbon, Rostov and Vlad.
I did counter intercept in all three cases with fighters (though, if I would have checked carefully, I should not have added the second Italian fighter). All A-A rolls were too close to "average" to do any damage.

Lisbon

Attachment (1)

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2461

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/7/2017 9:34:21 PM

ashkpa

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

Rostov:

Attachment (1)

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2462

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/7/2017 9:34:51 PM

ashkpa

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

Vlad:

Attachment (1)

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2463

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/7/2017 10:30:04 PM

ashkpa

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

There are two axis land attacks. One in Libya at +19.x B. And one on the resource hex next to Vlad. The RU can provide GS to this attack. I have provided shore bombardment (shown in the odds) and have another 2.5 points of ground support coming in. You can provide 1.5 points of defensive ground support with the LND in Vlad. Will you?

Attachment (1)

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2464

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/10/2017 3:35:44 AM

rkr1958

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

No ground support. By the way, on family vacation at beach, gulf shores. Won't be back until 20th, so reponses will be sporadioc until a day or two after we return.

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2465

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/10/2017 9:50:44 PM

ashkpa

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

Enjoy the vacation. Don't broil in those Gulf Waters. I hear they can be quite toasty - though I've never been to the Gulf Coast myself.

Land Attacks - both below average rolls, but I achieved my desire in both cases - the Harbin MIL paid the price near Vlad.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2466

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/10/2017 9:51:35 PM

ashkpa

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

Weather roll for impulse 7 of ND 1942.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2467

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/12/2017 11:55:53 AM

rkr1958

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: ashkpa

Enjoy the vacation. Don't broil in those Gulf Waters. I hear they can be quite toasty - though I've never been to the Gulf Coast myself.

Thanks. The gulf water is like bathwater, except for the salt, fish and such. We live only six hours by car away and come down every couple of years. For you mwif folks out there we are just south of Mobile on an island where fort morgan is located. Ft morgan is an old civil war fort and fell to the yankees. It was also manned in both world wars but is now open to the public. I don't see how men fought in wool uniforms in this climate during the civil war.

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2468

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/21/2017 2:53:51 PM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #7. Actions. Weather.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2469

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/21/2017 2:55:21 PM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #7. RN. No Combat, Contested Sea Areas.

Not possible for axis to initiate.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2470

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/21/2017 2:57:59 PM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1943./ Allied #7. USN. No Combat, Contested Sea Areas.

No opportunity for the IJN to attempt combat.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2471

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/21/2017 2:59:52 PM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1943./ Allied #7. USN. China Sea.

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

1. The IJN have two planes that can react. Will they and, if so, where?

2. Other instructions?

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2472

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/21/2017 3:03:15 PM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1943./ Allied #7. USN. The Solomons.

The USN will not attempt to initiate combat in the Solomons. Neither side have any planes that can react

3. Do the Japanese wish to attempt to initiate combat? If so, what are your instructions?

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2473

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/21/2017 3:05:51 PM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. RN. East Med.

The RN will not attempt to initiate combat in the East Med.

4. Do the Italians wish to try?

5. If so, both sides have planes that can react. Do the Italian planes wish to react? If so, where?

6. Other instructions?

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by rkr1958 -- 7/21/2017 3:06:57 PM >

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2474

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/21/2017 3:51:25 PM

rkr1958

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

By the way here's a "MWiF" map showing were we vacationed. We just got by yesterday. The inserted picture at the right bottom is of my son and I parasailing in the Gulf of Mexico. In the background you can see the towers of the condos where we stayed. The inserted picture at the left bottom is a picture of Fort Morgan, one of the two forts that guarded the entrance to Mobile Bay. It has a sister fort on Dolphin Island on the other side of the bay. Fort Morgan fell in August 1864 during the Battle of Mobile Bay.

My son and I make a visit to the fort. While there I talk to a lady at the fort who works for the US parks service. We started talking about the Battle of Mobile Bay and our conversation drifted to WW2. Well, I actually took it there. I mentioned German u-boat activity during WW2 in the Gulf. And you what! She said all that was a myth! I tried to argue but she adamantly held to here position that there hadn't been any naval actions in the Gulf of Mexico since the Battle of Mobile Bay in August of 1964. I was dumbfounded. I can't believe our park services allow someone in a position to talk history with visitors to the fort that's so ignorant of history. U-166 was sunk by the Robert E. Lee in July 1942. Also, in May of 1942 alone, German u-boats sank 41 ships. I only hope that our teachers teaching our kids history aren't as ignorant and stubborn as this lady was. She did remind me of one particular school teacher my son had in the 8th grade a few years back.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2475

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/22/2017 1:07:48 AM

ashkpa

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

quote:

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

1. The IJN have two planes that can react. Will they and, if so, where?

2. Other instructions?

1. No reactions to the zone.

2. Want to protect the CP while doing damage to the subs. I believe if I have 4 surprise points or more, I'll make it an air-sea and move the damage up 2 or more columns. Some possibility under those conditions that a damaged sub could remain for another round, but I'll live with that.

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2476

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/22/2017 1:08:48 AM

ashkpa

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

quote:

The USN will not attempt to initiate combat in the Solomons. Neither side have any planes that can react

3. Do the Japanese wish to attempt to initiate combat? If so, what are your instructions?

No initiation in this zone.

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2477

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/22/2017 1:16:30 AM

ashkpa

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

quote:

The RN will not attempt to initiate combat in the East Med.

4. Do the Italians wish to try?

5. If so, both sides have planes that can react. Do the Italian planes wish to react? If so, where?

6. Other instructions?

4. Yes, I will initiate (I believe you only have fighters that can react, if I am wrong and there is an air unit with air-sea strength, then I will not initiate - it is possible you port-port transported a NAV that I am not aware of it).
5. No reactions from the axis air forces.
6. Sink the CP. If I can do this by saving surprise points to be able to select the target, do it (I suspect I'll need at least 4 SP to select a surface battle first). 2nd priority is to keep the Italian BB safe and undamaged, so use other surprise points to reduce allied damage and the last priority is to do damage to the CW surface fleet involved.

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2478

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/22/2017 3:00:48 AM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #7. USN. China Sea.

Both search rolls fail.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2479

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/22/2017 3:03:36 AM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #7. East Med.

The CW reacts with a fighter to the 0-box. They have no planes with air to sea factors in range. The Italians find and surprise the CW. The Italians use 4 surprise points for surface and 3 surprise points to select the TRS providing supply. The TRS is damaged and then forced to abort. The Italian battleships is also forced to aborted.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2480

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/22/2017 3:05:21 AM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #7. East Med. Round 2.

The RN stays.

7. Do the Italians wish to stay?

8. If so, what are your instructions?

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2481

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/22/2017 4:58:42 AM

ashkpa

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

quote:

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #7. East Med. Round 2.

The RN stays.

7. Do the Italians wish to stay?

8. If so, what are your instructions?

Yes the Italians stay. No new reactions. Avoid combat if possible.

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2482

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/22/2017 1:45:23 PM

rkr1958

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: ashkpa

quote:

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #7. East Med. Round 2.

The RN stays.

7. Do the Italians wish to stay?

8. If so, what are your instructions?

Yes the Italians stay. No new reactions. Avoid combat if possible.

Next round searches unsuccessful. Combat ends in the East Med with the Italians still in supply and the CW out of supply in Libya / Egypt.

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2483

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/22/2017 3:40:47 PM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #7. Soviet Artillery Ground Strike.

Soviet artillery manage to disorganize Guderian and his armor HQ. Good shooting boys!

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2484

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/22/2017 3:42:04 PM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #7. USSR, Europe.

With the long break that Pat and I have had from this game I had forgotten how dire the situation was for the Soviet Union.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2485

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/22/2017 3:43:02 PM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #7. USSR, Asia.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2486

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/22/2017 3:43:35 PM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #7. USSR, Mongolia.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2487

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/22/2017 3:45:26 PM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #7. USMC 2nd Marine Division. Saipan.

With Saipan out of supply and only defended by a notional, the USMC 2nd Marine Division easily captures the island and destroyed a Japanese aircraft unit and pilot in the process.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2488

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/22/2017 3:47:28 PM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #7. "The Western Front".

No movement or action by the allies in Spain. In West Africa, Gort and a Canadian Mil setup shop on the coast just south of the Moroccan border.