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 83 84 [85] 86 87 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/29/2017 3:01:34 AM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #11. The Marianas.

The USN is attempting to initiate a naval combat in the Marianas. The IJN has two air units which can react. The H6K based in Sapporo and the fighter based in Truk.

Will one or both of these air units react?.

If so, where?

If contact is made, what are you orders?

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2521

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/29/2017 3:06:43 AM

rkr1958

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: ashkpa

And the USA took a?

Well it appears that bug is back. The USA took a combine.

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2522

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/29/2017 3:59:26 AM

ashkpa

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

quote:

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #11. Contested Sea Areas. The Marshalls.

The USN decides NOT to attempt to initiate combat; however, the IJN submarine unit that failed the intercept attempt can.

Do you wish to attempt to initiate combat? If so, what are your orders if contact is made?

Too Hot for me now. Subs stay under and do not search.

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2523

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/29/2017 4:01:03 AM

ashkpa

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

quote:

The RN will not to attempt to initiate combat in the East Med. However, the Italians can if they wish. The only additional air unit that the CW has available that could react is a fighter based on the coast in Egypt.

Do the Italians wish to attempt to initiate combat? If so, what are their orders if contact is made?

I will not at this time.

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2524

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/29/2017 4:01:54 AM

ashkpa

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

quote:

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #11. The Marianas.

The USN is attempting to initiate a naval combat in the Marianas. The IJN has two air units which can react. The H6K based in Sapporo and the fighter based in Truk.

Will one or both of these air units react?.

If so, where?

If contact is made, what are you orders?

Neither reacts.

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2525

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/29/2017 4:02:55 AM

ashkpa

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

If I have enough SP, I will avoid combat in the Marianas.

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2526

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/29/2017 3:04:57 PM

rkr1958

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: ashkpa

If I have enough SP, I will avoid combat in the Marianas.

Combat avoided.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2527

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/29/2017 3:35:42 PM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #11. USSR, Ground Strikes x 3.

The USSR is attempting three ground strikes. The Luftwaffe has four fighter units that can intercept.

How does the Luftwaffe wish to respond to these ground strikes?

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by rkr1958 -- 7/29/2017 3:36:12 PM >

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2528

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/29/2017 8:14:46 PM

ashkpa

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

quote:

How does the Luftwaffe wish to respond to these ground strikes?

I will ignore those gnats flying around. No interceptions.

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2529

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/29/2017 8:33:17 PM

rkr1958

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: ashkpa

quote:

How does the Luftwaffe wish to respond to these ground strikes?

I will ignore those gnats flying around. No interceptions.

Gnats indeed.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2530

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/29/2017 8:59:24 PM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1940. Allied #11. USSR, Land Combat.

The Soviets will be conducting two land combat. Von Bock can provide HQ support to the second combat. Will he?

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2531

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/29/2017 9:20:24 PM

ashkpa

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

quote:

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1940. Allied #11. USSR, Land Combat.

The Soviets will be conducting two land combat. Von Bock can provide HQ support to the second combat. Will he?

Yes he will. The turn is likely to end anyway.

I believe I have two fighters that can fly has bombers to the northern most attack. If that is all I have that can fly, then that is what they will do.

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2532

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/29/2017 9:25:24 PM

rkr1958

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: ashkpa

quote:

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1940. Allied #11. USSR, Land Combat.

The Soviets will be conducting two land combat. Von Bock can provide HQ support to the second combat. Will he?

Yes he will. The turn is likely to end anyway.

I believe I have two fighters that can fly has bombers to the northern most attack. If that is all I have that can fly, then that is what they will do.

OK, will do. But they'll be opposed by one Soviet fighter unit.

< Message edited by rkr1958 -- 7/29/2017 9:27:47 PM >

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2533

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/29/2017 9:30:35 PM

rkr1958

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

quote:

ORIGINAL: ashkpa

quote:

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1940. Allied #11. USSR, Land Combat.

The Soviets will be conducting two land combat. Von Bock can provide HQ support to the second combat. Will he?

Yes he will. The turn is likely to end anyway.

I believe I have two fighters that can fly has bombers to the northern most attack. If that is all I have that can fly, then that is what they will do.

OK, will do. But they'll be opposed by one Soviet fighter unit.

No worry, both German fighter units flying as bombers make it through.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2534

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/29/2017 9:47:41 PM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #11. USSR, Land Combat.

The two Soviet land combats aren't a complete disaster but don't go very well with two slightly lower than expected average rolls.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2535

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/29/2017 9:48:14 PM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #11. USSR.

Yikes.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2536

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/29/2017 9:49:05 PM

rkr1958

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

Turn 20. Nov/Dec 1942. Allied #11.

Double Yikes. This turn continues. The USSR is toast.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2537

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/29/2017 10:10:28 PM

ashkpa

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

Yeh, those two attacks are going to come back to haunt you. The HQ stack will be put out of supply easily and defends with 2 strength. I may be able to put the upper stack out of supply as well (haven't checked if there is a city underneath one of the stacks), but that would have me getting more aggressive with the lead units. Not sure if I will.

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2538

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/29/2017 11:52:06 PM

ashkpa

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

ND42 i13 axis actions shown

Attachment (1)

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2539

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/30/2017 12:17:05 AM

ashkpa

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

ND42 i13 Naval Combat Possibilities.
Key Moves so far. JP flied a bomber and fighter to the 4-box of the Marianas. The reminder of JP fleet in Truk sailed to the 4-box of the Marianas. The CA in Manila carried the Mar-div to the 4-box of the Bismark Sea.

Italy sailed 2x CA and 2x BB to the E. Med, sub to the N. Atlantic and 2 subs to the Faeroes Gap.

I will start the searches in the areas later this evening.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2540

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/30/2017 1:20:09 AM

ashkpa

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

Searches so far,
a) Central Pacific rolls of 4/7 (axis/allies) --> no combat
b) Arabian Sea rolls of 8/8 --> no combat
c) W. Indian Ocean rolls of 10/2 --> no combat
d) Marianas rolls of 1/7 result in combat (images below)
JP has 7 SP. Use 4 to select surface combat. Use 3 to select first target.
2X 2D 2A taken by the allies
X 2D taken by the axis
Allies first X is taken by the CV Enterprise (choosen by the JP). It makes it's damage control roll and is only damaged.
The USA gets to assign the other damage. I will then continue with the axis damage and round 2 if you are staying.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2541

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/30/2017 2:29:20 PM

rkr1958

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

1. X to CA Portland.
2. D to CA Houston.
3. D to CA Portland
4. A to Enterprise
5. A to Enterprise if not aborted; otherwise to a damaged CA.

The USN will not stay for a second round. Return all ships back to Pearl.

< Message edited by rkr1958 -- 7/30/2017 2:35:35 PM >

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2542

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/30/2017 7:23:09 PM

ashkpa

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

I altered instruction 3. I assumed you really did not want to have the damaged Portland make a D roll, so I applied to Baltimore.
You made all the damage control rolls except the 2nd A on the Enterprise, where failing meant nothing.
I decided, I'd rather have a damaged Yamato than a sunk other ship. Glad I made that decision when my first damage control roll was a 1.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2543

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/30/2017 7:40:16 PM

ashkpa

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

North Atlantic Search rolls of 1/4 resulted in Italian sub engaging the convoys in the 0-box.
Net damaged sub and 2 CP destroyed.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2544

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/30/2017 7:49:48 PM

ashkpa

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

Faeroes Gap the search rolls were 3/2, so both 3-boxes found each other with the CW having 1 SP point.
End result was the CA and both subs were aborted. (I moved the CA to Liverpool)

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by ashkpa -- 7/30/2017 7:51:44 PM >

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2545

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/30/2017 7:56:47 PM

ashkpa

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

Last comes the E. Med
Image below shows what is there after the Axis moves and reactions. Does the CW want to react the fighter on the Egyptian Coast to the zone (0 or 1 box)?

Attachment (1)

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2546

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/30/2017 8:32:43 PM

rkr1958

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

Yes, 2nd fighter will react to 0-box.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ashkpa

I altered instruction 3. I assumed you really did not want to have the damaged Portland make a D roll, so I applied to Baltimore.

You're right, I didn't want to apply a D to an already damaged CA. That was a mess up on my part. Thanks for correcting!

< Message edited by rkr1958 -- 7/30/2017 8:35:13 PM >

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2547

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/30/2017 9:33:43 PM

ashkpa

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

E. Med. Rnd 1 search rolls of 3/5 resulted in much of the axis force finding and engaging the 0-box with 6-SP.
Made it an Naval Air Battle (thought about surface). Used 2 SP to move my A-A up 1 and 4 SP to move yours down 2 for a net +/-2 on the chart.
First round went my way.
I determined that you would clear the weaker Italian Bomber and your lead fighter was shot down.
You appear to still be online, so I'll see if you want to stay for round two of the air to air combat (if I don't hear in a bit, I'll assume yes. This is based on past instruction history).

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by ashkpa -- 7/30/2017 9:34:07 PM >

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2548

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/30/2017 10:10:18 PM

rkr1958

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

Yes, the CW will stay for a second round of AA.

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2549

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 7/30/2017 10:30:53 PM

ashkpa

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

Round 2 went well for the axis. Cleared the GE NAV and shot down the second CW fighter. 2A was the result (less than I expected, I had forgotten the rain halved the A-S factorsJ). Aborted the CW CP and the weakest CA which failed it's damage control.

Last image in sequence below shows the status going into round 2 of the naval combat. Will you stay?