RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A)

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: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A)

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: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A)

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 11/14/2017 4:33:46 PM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

The 6 CVs and 3 CVLs are moving together, formed into 2 TFs. One TF is composed of the Zuikaku, Shokaku, Hiryu, and Soryu. They are escorted by the modern CAs: Tone and Chikuma, along with Maya, which is an older CA and was part of the Chokai grp, which is now at Honshu recieving their March upgrades. The Maya lacks the AA capabilities that I like in CAs for my CV escorts, but after distinguishing herself in several surface enagements (including pounding the Houston- which recon reports show in Townsville receiving repaits), Maya has the most experienced crew available for service with Chokai and Takao in port. The DDs are all Akatsuki or Shikanami class (Fubuki IIIs in stock) for the high AA rating and reasonable endurance. These will be replaced with Yugumo class DDs as these become available.

The CVs have been at sea for nearly 3 months continuously, putting into port only at Rabaul for minors repairs for 10 days. The wear on the ships is showing, and they really need some time in port. Unfortunately, there is no time. The amphibious bonus expires in 20 days, and I want to be ashore on Lord Howe before it expires. The CVs will have to stay at sea for 3 more weeks. Soryu's damage control teams have done a nice job reducing flooding damage down to just the 6 major damage points, and she will probably only need 2 weeks tending from the AR, which is on its way to Rabaul.

My air settings have been standard for most of my time at sea, because I do not really have a feel for how Apbarog likes to conduct his naval air ops. I have the CV-group A6M2s, the B5N2 Kates, and the Vals set at 12K. The CV-group A6M2s are set to 50% CAP. The B5N1 Kates from the CVLs are set at 9K, and the A6M2 groups from the CVLs are set at 9k to provide some layer to the CAP. Hiryu's fighter grp is complemented with a size-9 squadron of A5M4s which are set at 4K, 70% CAP, range 0. Akagi has 21 additional A6M2s from the 4th Ku-S-1 squadron. These are set to 70% CAP, 16K, range 0 (this was one of the groups that swept Norfold Island).

Fatigue among the Zero pilots is on the rise, especially after the fighter sweeps over Norfolk Island. I have decided to move close to New Caledonia and additional fighter cover at Koumac and reduce the range of the CV bombing groups and A6M2 grps to 2 hexes for tomorrow to bring the fatigue in my A6M2s a little. The CVs will then move north to meet fast AOs, when all bombing groups will stand down, and all A6M2s will be set to range 0 to recover fatigue before the Lord Howe operation, which will be perilous, requiring the CVs to cover amphibious grps and SCTFs close to major Australian bases.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 151

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 11/16/2017 8:49:21 PM

Bif1961

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

Having all those CVs in one TF risks lack of coordination if they have to attack an Allied carrier TF. It might be better to break them down into 2 TFs if you believe a carrier battle might be in the offing. I do understand your lack of heavy units to provide adequate AAA and risk a surface attack.

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 152

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 11/17/2017 2:03:40 PM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

Strikes have a higher probability of being uncoordinated for Japan if a CVTF contains more than 200+ (a random number between 0 and 200) aircraft: so the limit in a CVTF for Japan, if one wants to ensure coordination, is 200-400. I have the CVs divided into 2 TFs: the one contains the 4 CVs shown above. The total number of aircraft in this CVTF is approximately 250, so the odds of perfect strike coordination are pretty high: about 75%. The other CVTF contains Akagi, Kaga, Ryujo, Shoho, and Zuiho. The total number of A/C in that TF is about 230. Again the odds of perfect strike coordination from that TF are pretty high, around 85%.

In my experience, 2 CVTFs operating in the same hex will often coordinate their strikes, though not always. So, by dividing the CVs into 2 TFs in this way, I think that I have optimized the probability of good strike coordination. I set reaction range to 0 on both TFs, to prevent one TF from reacting to an enemy TF without the other and thereby separating the 2 CVTFs. Others have stated that they have had their CVTFs separated when one reacts while the other does not.

The escorts for both CVTFs are not optimum in my opinion. I have limited both CVTFs to 15 ships, with 8 DDs in each. More than 15 ships reduces the AA effectiveness of each ship in the TF (and increasing the likelihood of collisions in my experience).

I always like to use Tone and Chikuma and the 3 CS as CV escorts, but I also like to put fast BBs (for extra AA, in case of surface engagement, and to draw aerial attacks away from the CVs) and the more modern CAs in my CVTFs. In this case, I have an older CA, no fast BBs, and both CS are in the other CVTF (the one that contains Akagi and Kaga). This is not my optimum selection of escorts. However, I have been operating these CVs at extended range for 3 months consecutively, and fuel in SoPAC was a major concern until recently. I decided to leave the fast BBs in port to conserve fuel. Later in 1942, and into 1943, when U.S. naval air is a greater threat, I will certainly, almost always, deploy fast BBs with the fleet CVs.

The other thing is that I do not have an SCTF cover TFs lurking near the CVs. This runs counter to my typical deployment. This was also to conserve fuel, and because I recently sank 6 CAs in SoPac, so the threat of U.S. SCTFs is lessened. I will certainly cover the CVs with an SCTF for the Lord Howe operation.

(in reply to Bif1961)

Post #: 153

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 11/19/2017 6:59:47 PM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

March 14, 1942.

Japanese forces enter Rangoon. Apbarog has evacuated Burma mostly, and this worries me, because all allied assets in India are intact. I suspect that the Burma front will be a problem in this game.

I intend, eventually, to deploy 6 heavily reinforced divisions along the India-Burma border. There are 4 in the theater at the moment. The plan, at this point, is to establish a forward position along the Imphal-Ledo road down to Akyab. The IJA will then withdraw the bulk of its forces to the Indian-Burma riverline and maintain only a skirmish line in this forward position.

I am seriously considering an operation to capture Ceylon in this game, but I will have to see what assets are available after the Luzon operation is completed and after the IJA is engaged on the ground in Australia. It will be probably be July at the earliest before any invasion of Ceylon could commence.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Aurorus -- 11/19/2017 7:00:41 PM >

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 154

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 11/19/2017 7:36:18 PM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

I want to take a moment to rant so that I feel better.

I have no idea why I suffer such ridiculous operational losses sometimes. Here is a screenshot of my operational losses for today. These 4 Oscar Ics are from 1 squadron that was flying long-range CAP from Moulmein over Rangoon: a range of 2 hexes. T This is 10% of the entire squadron crashed for no reason in 1 day. The pilots in this squadron now have 29 fatigue. Yesterday, when they were assigned to the mission, they had 6 fatigue. There is not a plane in the squadron with any damage or with aircraft fatigue higher than 15. The weather in the hex was overcast, and the airfield is size 4. Every pilot in the squadron has experience of 65 or higher, with most in the 70s. This is absolute, complete, and utter garbage: losing 10$ of an entire squadron of aircraft with veteran pilots on a normal day of routine operations using a paved airfield. Absolute garbage. If the IJA were this incompetent, they would have lost the war in 1942.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Aurorus -- 11/19/2017 7:46:29 PM >

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 155

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 11/19/2017 8:49:00 PM

MakeeLearn

Posts: 4278
Joined: 9/11/2016
Status: offline

Iam not saying whether your numbers/circumstances are correct, just some info:

"In terms of losses, the best records are those developed by J. Fukamizu, who was in charge of the statistical section of the Japanese Naval Air Department. Although many records were destroyed at wars end, Fukamizu recreated the numbers for the USSBS. For example, for the period April 1, 1942 to April 1, 1943, the JNAF lost 882 fighters in combat and 768 to operational causes. In the same period the JNAF lost 631 tactical bombers to combat and 131 to operational causes. Medium bomber losses were 291 in combat and 174 to operational causes.

From April 1, 1943 to April 1, 1944 Japanese navy fighter losses were 1,170 in combat and 1,673 to operational causes; tactical bomber losses were 367 in combat and 824 due to operational causes; medium bomber losses were 306 to combat and 663 to operational causes."

https://ww2db.com/doc.php?q=30

"In regards to the RAAF losses in the Pacific War total casualities suffered were 2,020 killed, 886 wounded and 417 POW's. In terms of aircraft the RAAF lost 250 to combat and a further 395 to operational causes.
NB: The RAAF figures are from George Odgers "Air War Against Japan", part of the official series Australia In The War Of 1939-45."

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 156

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 11/19/2017 10:35:56 PM

PaxMondo

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

You may also wish to read other AAR's. Mike, for example. his ops losses are historically less than 1% for the IJ IIRC. I shoot for under 0.5%.

My most recent game (mod test), I was at 0.21% (149477/314).

LRCAP is hard on planes and low DUR planes that the IJ fly don't handle it well. When you get Frank/George with DUR at 30 and above, you will find that some mission profiles (like LRCAP) suffer far fewer losses.

Without more details, no specific advice is possible. Would need to see combat reports (ideally, watch the combat replay) for the turn involved, and possibly need to see the prior 2 or 3 turns as well to really diagnose anything.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to MakeeLearn)

Post #: 157

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 11/20/2017 12:18:25 AM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

There is nothing to see. They were not involved in any combat. They were stood down at Moulmein the last 2 days, while another squadron flew CAP over the advance. That squadron stood down, and 1st Sentai flew today. I have no idea what other information would be relevant beyond distance flown, plane fatigue/damage, pilot fatigue, airfield capacity, pilot experience, and weather.

If there is some other variable, I sure would be curious to know what this all-powerful variable is that caused a squadron of veteran pilots to crash 10% of their aircraft in good weather after a short mission on a paved runway. The Burma Triangle variable... jajaja. The result is absurd... period.

< Message edited by Aurorus -- 11/20/2017 12:19:55 AM >

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 158

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 11/20/2017 3:17:22 AM

Kofiman

Posts: 40
Joined: 7/8/2014
Status: offline

4542 sorties flown today, five operational losses.

That just doesn't seem like very many ops losses, not by half. If anything, suppression methods for ops losses may be too strong.

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 159

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 11/20/2017 3:25:40 AM

PaxMondo

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

4500 sorties is a reasonable number for IJ in early to mid 42. If you are taking care, 5 is definitely achievable. Most players experience far more as they run a greater tempo ... +7000 in mid 42. So ops losses are tied to tempo, % of aircraft involved in missions, and then to other things like rest%, distance, etc etc etc.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Kofiman)

Post #: 160

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 11/20/2017 5:02:58 AM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kofiman

4542 sorties flown today, five operational losses.

That just doesn't seem like very many ops losses, not by half. If anything, suppression methods for ops losses may be too strong.

I am going to great lengths to reduce operational losses and supply use for my air forces, especially in this game, where Apbarog has withdrawn from several theaters. That is why it is frustrating to lose 4 fighters from 1 squadron for no apparent reason. The more that I play, the more that I realize the importance of force preservation for Japan in the early going. I have worked a good deal since the first time that I sat to play this game on minimizing losses for my ground forces.

I am focused recently on using my air force judiciously and maintaining best practices to reduce air losses. This is very important, especially for Nakajima 35-engine planes, because I like to shut off production of Zeros and/or Oscars for a time in 1942 to generate additional research points. I will build out to 540 Nakajima 35 engines, which comes out to 18 engines per day. But with PDU:off, I have 8 factories on A6M5 R&D (and hope to convert 4 of these, at least to A7M2 eventually) and 4 factories on Oscar R&D. To get a bonus for each factory will require 12 engines per day, leaving only 6. I am producing 80 Zeros per month and 80 Oscars. That is almost 6 engines per day. This does not include Nicks, Lillies, A6M3s, and A6M2 Rufes: all of which also use the Nakajima 35. 1 Nick per day, 1 Lilly per day, and 1 Rufe or A6M3 is 5 more engines per day. So, something must be shut off each day or R&D will suffer. Often, this will be Lillies, but I do like the Lilly IIa, because it is the only Japanese bomber in 1942 with armor.

< Message edited by Aurorus -- 11/20/2017 5:16:15 AM >

(in reply to Kofiman)

Post #: 161

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 11/20/2017 5:30:29 AM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

March 14

On the theme of force preservation. I have maintained a defensive posture at Koumac, only flying CAP, until ground forces can advance on Noumea. This is to preserve A6M2 pilots. Apbarog tried another set of sweeps and raids yesterday against the 2 Zero squadrons there. The 2 new recently upgraded radar sets improved detection time slightly, up to 15 minutes from the prior 10.

Morning Air attack on Koumac , at 113,156

Weather in hex: Light cloud

Raid spotted at 44 NM, estimated altitude 7,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 15 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 55

Allied aircraft
P-40E Warhawk x 12

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
P-40E Warhawk: 6 destroyed

The timing of the attacks worked out very well for Apbarog this time. The first group to arrive were P-40Es at low altitude, which drew my CAP down some. The P-40Es took heavy losses, however, as the Zeros on station outnumbered them and dove. The next raid to arrive was a group of liberators at 9k. Several Zeros were still on station at exactly 9K, and at least 1 Liberator was separated from the formation by a head-on attack.

Nakajima, B. in a A6M2 Zero makes head on attack ... forces LB-30 Liberator out of formation

The next raid to arrive was a flight of B-17Ds, which also came in at 9K and also took very heavy casualties. The last raid, however, was a fighter sweep from P-400s, which came in over an A6M2 force depleted from the 3 prior battles. The P-400s had altitude and numbers and achieved a good kill ratio of 12 to 7 against my Zeros. On the day, however, I lost only 3 A6M2 pilots KIA, although I had 6 wounded and one of the KIAs was an experience 84 pilot. Both S Sasai and J. Sakai were involved in the battle, but neither added to their kill counts nor was lost. (Both these famous Japanese aces remain at 3 kills each for the war so far). Here are the losses for the day.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Aurorus -- 11/20/2017 5:39:27 AM >

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 162

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 11/20/2017 5:36:17 AM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

With the 3 A6M2 pilots KIA yesterday, I have lost only 17 naval fighter pilots for the entire war so far as KIAs, and the naval aviators have accounted for approximately 85% of my total air-to-air kills, or about 350 allied planes. 1 pilot per 20 planes. I am very pleased with this ratio. If only it could continue. Here are my top pilots.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 163

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 11/20/2017 12:07:02 PM

PaxMondo

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aurorus

...but I do like the Lilly IIa, because it is the only Japanese bomber in 1942 with armor.

Helen ...

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 164

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 11/20/2017 3:01:55 PM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aurorus

...but I do like the Lilly IIa, because it is the only Japanese bomber in 1942 with armor.

Helen ...

The Helen IIa has armor and does appear in 9/42 in DBB. I forget the stats for Helen in stock, but I think that the first generation Helen also lacks armor in stock. In PDU:off, there is only 1 squadron that can upgrade to the Helen IIa: several more to the Helen IIb, which does not appear until 9/43.

I noticed that more squadrons seem to upgrade to the Lilly DB in DBB than in stock. This is good news. I like the Lilly DB very much, and I will use it often in this game. It comes online shortly before I will begin converting most A6 squadrons to the A6M8 and some Oscar squadrons to Tojo IIbs and Tonies. I will no longer be using so many Nakajima 35 engines for fighters in 1943 and will not need 8 for A6M R&D (since the A6M8 uses the Mitsubishi 33 engine), so I will produce the Lilly DB in some quantity.

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 165

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 11/21/2017 4:52:38 AM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

March 16, 1942.

A player on the defensive is often best served by fighting at the periphery: striking where the enemy is not. Apbarog has (wisely in my opinion) begun and air campaign in China. I try to commit as little as possible to China. I buy out no Manchurian units for China, and I like to maintain as small a fighter force in China as possible: using squadrons in China only to CAP and improve the experience of pilots just out of training. In this game I have only 54 Nates and 12 Oscar 1cs in China.

Apbarog has realized that I have little actual fighter cover in China. (Nates do not count as actual fighters). A few days ago, he began sending B-25s and B-17s from Chungking to strike my columns moving through clear terrain. Yesterday, he bombed the airfield at Nanking with unescorted B-17s. A handful of Nates, with rookie pilots just out of training, managed to damage a few of the B-17s, but they were still able to destroy a few planes on the ground. He had committed a squadron of P-40s and at least 1 squadron of AVG to the Chinese theater. Recent reconnaissance shows another fighter squadron, probably a 2nd AVG squadron. has reinfored the theater. 70 P-40s gives him complete air superiority over my token fighter force.

I do not want to commit a large number of front-line fighters to China for the long-term. Instead, I will press through Burma as quickly as possible and try to force an air battle over the India-China border, which, along with supply constraints, should force Apbarog to remove his U.S. air assets from China. In the interim, however, I will seek to engage the USAAF over China. I have a new Zero squadron filling out on Honshu and I recently upgraded a small size-27 squadron of Nates in Manchuria to Oscar 1cs. With the 12 Oscars already in China, the addition of these 2 squadrons to China temporarily will give me a rough parity in the theater. It will be a few days before the A6M2s are ready to deploy. Once they are ready, I will look for opportunities to have a fight on the best terms possible for the IJN and IJA: either sweeping and bombing allied airfields or sortieing in force as a CAP trap.

So, we should have a major air battle over China in the coming days. If I can inflict disproportionate losses on the allies here, this success should carry over into the Burma/India theater and reduce the USAAF capacity to reinforce the RAF. (Of course, inflicting "disproportionate" losses on P-40s with Oscars is relative).

< Message edited by Aurorus -- 11/21/2017 5:01:06 AM >

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 166

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 11/24/2017 9:52:15 PM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

The Lord Howe force is assembling at the Southern edge of the Solomon Sea. I have only 3 SNLFs to spare. These are in an amphibious TF that will be the initial wave. A second wave of a port unit, JAAF aviation unit, and naval construction battalion will follow on as a second wave. 3 Flak units are leaving Rabaul this turn as a 3rd wave. All 6 CVs and the 3 CVLs will cover the landings. 2 SCTFs will also deploy: a heavy CA group composed of the old Furutaka CAs and a group with 2 Fast BBs, the CA Maya, Oi, and 2 other CLs. Tanaka is in command of this group.

Another division is in en route to Noumea from Java and is also entering the Solomon Sea. The 8th ID is also en route to SoPAC from Manchuria. I have a paradrop scheduled for the turn coming up at Schwebo to try to cut off a large number of British aviation support units deployed around the Burma basin and retreating up the rail-line. The A6M2s arrived at Nanchang in China this turn, so next turn I will begin the southern offensive in China and look to have an air-battle on favorable terms.

4th ID is 1 hex from Koumac with artillery support. A heavy CA group and an AKE are at Noumea awaiting 2 TKs, which are 1 day away, to begin bombarding Koumac. A light CL group, with 3 DMS, is also at Noumea, awaiting the TKs to move into Koumac and clear out any PT boats. 126 A6M2s are at Noumea and will sweep Koumac once the 4th ID is in the hex in conjuction with the naval bombardment. 27 Betties are also on station at Noumea to support both the Lord Howe Island operation and the Koumac operation. The final elements are assembling at Rabaul to fill out a 3rd division on New Caledonia and will begin loading next turn. Once the 8th division arrives, in SoPAC I will have 5 divisions in SoPac: 3 on New Caledonia. After Lord Howe and Koumac, the invasion of Australia will commence.

I was reviewing my pilot pools, and I have several pages of pilots previously WIA, mostly Zero pilots, slated to return to action in the next few months. Here is page 1 of 3 pages of WIA IJN pilots scheduled to return to action.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Aurorus -- 11/24/2017 9:55:39 PM >

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 167

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 11/29/2017 2:10:43 PM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

March 23, 1942

Apbarog has withdrawn at least one AVG unit from China. I finally had an air battle over China, which occurred over Chengsha after several failed attempts to have a battle over a more favorable location (i.e. against allied units on LRCAP over one of my units to save pilots). The A6M2s with rookie pilots (air 65, exp. 50-55, and def. 70) came in first on a sweep and performed well (for rookies), scoring even, 4 kills apiece, against the P-40s. I lost only 1 pilot KIA and 1 MIA.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Changsha , at 82,52

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid spotted at 31 NM, estimated altitude 25,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 10 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 23

Allied aircraft
P-40E Warhawk x 24

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
P-40E Warhawk: 2 destroyed

Aircraft Attacking:
13 x A6M2 Zero sweeping at 21000 feet

CAP engaged:
21st PS with P-40E Warhawk (0 airborne, 10 on standby, 10 scrambling)
4 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 20000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 37 minutes

36 Oscar 1cs (with better pilots exp. and air 65-70, def. 70) followed on and scored 4 kills to 0.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Changsha , at 82,52

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid spotted at 31 NM, estimated altitude 25,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 10 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 31

Allied aircraft
P-40E Warhawk x 9

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
P-40E Warhawk: 3 destroyed

Aircraft Attacking:
26 x Ki-43-Ic Oscar sweeping at 19000 feet

CAP engaged:
21st PS with P-40E Warhawk (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
9 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters between 16000 and 29000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 66 minutes

The Lord Howe invasion force is 2 days away. A second amphibious grp. with 3 SNLFs, supported by the BBs Mutsu and Nagato is 2 days from Wake Island (which I want to take before the amphibious bonus expires). This is a move unsupported by naval air. I have Mavis and 4 Emilies and 2 SS searching the area around Wake for any sign of U.S. CVs, but this unsupported move worries me.

Everything seems to be going according to plan.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Aurorus -- 11/29/2017 2:44:20 PM >

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 168

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 11/29/2017 2:43:38 PM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

Everything seems to be going according to plan, except this very troubling report. I like to keep 2-3 long range subs patrolling about 1 day's sailing west of Pearl. The submarines on station reached their operations limit, and their replacements are still repairing system damage at Kwajalein. So, 2 of my subs on station had begun to return to Kwajalein. The last sub on station, I-6, on its last day of patrol, spotted an allied armada sailing west: 6 transport groups with hvy cover. Under cover of darkness, it moved in for a closer look at the lead TF and found the BB Mississippi.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Lihue at 176,110

Japanese Ships
SS I-6, hits 1

Allied Ships
BB Mississippi, Torpedo hits 1
DD Selfridge

SS I-6 launches 4 torpedoes at BB Mississippi

It shadowed the allied armada into the daylight hours and was able to provide a report on the composition of one of the allied transport groups. Great job by I-6! Combined Fleet HQ is preparing the appopriate commendations for the captain, chief, radio operator, and sound man.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack near Niihau at 175,110

Japanese Ships
SS I-6, hits 1

Allied Ships
CL Durban
DD Cushing
APD Fox
AP Tasker H Bliss
AP Harris
AP Wharton
AK Castor
xAK Katrina Luckenbach
DD Tucker
DD Downes

This does not look like a transport group. This appears to be an amphibious group: one of 6, sailing with BB heavy cover. This does not appear to be a U.S. division and support moving to reinforce Australia. Why would Apbarog break a reinforcement group into 6 TFs? This armada seems to be a set of TFs designed for a series of coordinated amphibious landings, which can only have 1 destination: the Marshalls. What should I do?

The Marshalls are mostly empty. There are some small minefields with ACMs 150 mines at the larger bases, an AS, a few SS repairing at Kwajalein, port units at Jaluit and Kwajalein, a JNAF coy and a btn at the size 4 airfields. Most of the Marshalls reinforcements, 8 SNLFs, are still at Tokyo awaiting some 14-Knot xAK-ts to bring them to Truk for distribution to the various Marhshall bases. The 8th ID is broken down into component parts and is near Rabaul. There is not much AV on Truk at the moment either. The 2nd ID is at Rabaul and Port Moresby. The 24th Air HQ is at Truk and could move to Kusaie, but Kusaie is only a size 2 airfield at present and there is only 47 AV present at Kusaie.

If I mean to stop an invasion of the Marshalls, it can only be done via naval assets, and everything is far into SoPac, 2 days from Lord Howe Island. I could allow the allies to take the Marshalls and then counterattack in 2 months or so, after the Australia campaign has begun and I have "marshalled" more land forces. This is not a bad option, because the Marshalls is a good place to have a fight for Japan. However, all of those allied assets now assembled and moving west is as inviting a target as I will see in the entire war. Obviously, if he means to move all of this to the Marshalls, he will commit his CVs to provide air cover. This is an ideal engagement for Japan: a CV battle in March 1942 in Japanese waters. I have much thinking to do. I do not want to abandon the Lord Howe operation 36 hours before D-day, but if Apbarog does mean to attack the Marshalls, I have an opportunity to defeat the U.S. navy decisively right now.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Aurorus -- 11/29/2017 2:53:39 PM >

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 169

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 11/29/2017 10:42:23 PM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

I have thought about what to do all day about the allied armada west of Hawaii. I have reports of heavy radio traffic from Sydney for today and have had reports of heavy radio traffic from Auckland two days in a row. My CVTFs, strangely, have not been spotted in SoPAC, though my SCTF covering TF and the 1st and 2nd wave TFs were spotted for the first time today. The problem is that his armada is about 6 days from the Marshalls: 48 hexes. My CVs and SCTFs are also exactly 6 days, or 48 hexes from the Marshalls, and they will need at least 1 impulse to refuel. If I stay to cover the Lord Howe landing, even for 1 day, my CVs will not arrive in the Marshalls until 48 hours after the allies.

I have decided to withdraw, at least for 1 day, the amphib grps. to fighter cover at Noumea. The CVs and SCTFs will move back north, at least for 1 day. I will re-evaluate the situation tommorrow. I have only 7 days of amphibious bonus left, so I will have to make a final decision as to whether to cover the Marshalls or move on Lord Howe in the next 2 days. I do not want to move the amphibious group on Lord Howe unsupported. I fear the U.S. CVs may have just left Auckland to rendezvous with the armada. If so, they may move NE under fighter cover toward fighter cover at Koumac. If this is the case, I may be able to intercept them NE of New Caledonia. We shall see.

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 170

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 12/6/2017 11:57:00 AM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

March 27th, 1942

A few updates. It has been 4 days since I-6 spotted the armada of 5 amphibious groups and BB cover sailing West from Pearl. If the Marshalls is their destination, they should appear tomorrow.

On the 24th of March, I sent a small CL-led SCTF into Noumea to remove a flotilla of PT boats that moved in from Suva. They encountered an allied CA SCTF with Houston and Indianapolis and 3 CLs. I lost the CL and scored a torpedo hit on the Indianapolis: not a good exchange for me. I was surprised that he sent this SCTF into Noumea without fighter cover. My CVs were in the area, but he had not spotted my CVs in the area, only the fast BB cover group and the 1st and 2nd Lord Howe waves.

On the 25th, 26th, and 27th, I bombarded Noumea with CA groups operating from Koumac, where there is an AKE to replenish them. The bombardment on the 26th was followed up by a fighter sweep that caught a badly depleted squadron of P-400s on CAP. 11 P-400s were downed to 1 A6M2. All three waves from the Lord Howe invasion have moved under fighter cover at Koumac. The began unloading on the 27th. The Lord Howe operation has been put on hold, probably until after the general invasion of Australia.

One CA group is now returning to Tulagi to refuel, where 3 Tks are unloading. The other CA group is remaining on station at Koumac to cover the 3 groups unloading the units from the scrubbed Lord Howe operation. Search planes spotted the Houston SCTF 4 hexes SE of Noumea on the 27th, and a large number of allied float planes appeard over Koumac on the 27th, which may indicate the presence of allied CVs in the region. The Houston group may be covering the CVs. I am worried about the three CAs still on station here as well as the 3 amphib groups. We have 90 A6M2s at Koumac set to 80% cap range 0, so any CV-strike on my CAs should be very costly in terms of allied naval air. I also have 27 Betties, torpedo able, set to naval strike at 1,000 feet. Unescorted, they may be able to get a strike in on U.S. CVs under the CAP. They failed to find the Houston group yesterday, however, at a range of 8 with a good DL on the Houston group.

My CVs have moved NE and the DLs on Apbarog's submarines probably gave him some indication that my CVs were moving NE from New Caledonia. My CVs have moved just south of Nauru Island and spotted no subs yesterday, so he has lost track of them. Rather than move directly NE into the Marshalls, I have plotted the CVs to move east, just NW of Tarawa to cover the Gilberts. They will still be 1 days move from covering the major Marshalls bases, but I am thinking that he may divert the armada to the Gilberts to build up bases there, thinking that it is outside my search range.

Wake Island has fallen, with the loss of 2 APs, including the Buenos Aires Maru. No great loss. Buenos Aires is a miserable place. The proudest ship in the IJN, the Argentina Maru, is repairing at Yokohama, after gallantly saving half a regiment from allied raiders. The IJA is moving rapidly through Burma and encountering only token resistance. Magwe should fall next turn. The IJA is also manuevering for a major offensive in southern China. The allied redoubt at Bandoeng has been reduced to slightly above 200 AV by heavy artillery and a full-scale assault will be mounted in a week or so. A landing in Southern Luzon is being planned for the middle of May. SNLFs are moving to Koepang now to take the NW Aussie bases. Mop up operations will continue in the DEI for another month. The Australian campaign will commence in mid April, after the fall of Noumea.

I am toying with the idea of invading Ceylon after the Luzon campaign ends. We shall see how things develop.

More updates as the situation develops.

< Message edited by Aurorus -- 12/6/2017 12:53:17 PM >

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 171

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 12/6/2017 12:41:24 PM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

Here is the current scoresheet

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 172

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 12/7/2017 3:05:28 AM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

The state of the Japanese economy at the end of March 1942 as the amphibious bonus comes to an end. Supply use has become stable and global supply levels should start increasing now that most of the major industry expansion has been completed, with the exception of Nakajima 35 factories, of which there are 50 or 60 still to build.

I have used approxmately 300K more barrels of fuel than I have produced. This is to be expected during the amphibious bonus. The CVs will put into port soon, I hope, for two weeks or so to refit before supporting the invasion of Australia and a second attempt on Lord Howe Island.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 173

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 12/7/2017 3:11:26 AM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

Regional stockpiles. I need to assign a few more Adens to bring resources from Korea to Honshu.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Aurorus -- 12/7/2017 3:13:29 AM >

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 174

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 12/20/2017 6:33:04 PM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

We have reached April 10, 1942.

The action is slowing some, as I lost the initiative by moving my CVs to cover the Marshalls and probably allowed a major U.S. reinforcement convoy to reach Australia. In moving back south to support operations on New Caledonia, CV Hiryu took a torpedo as part of a general rampage of allied submarines, which scored, over a 2-week period, hits on 2 CVs (Hiryu and Soryu) and 2 CAs in addition to sinking a TK and an AO.

In the wake of this torpedo hit on Hiryu (which was already at 10 system damage from being at sea continually), I could not leave the CVs at sea any longer, and they have returned to port to refit. They will no return the entire distance to Japan, but will remain in theater in SoPAC and will refit with AR and naval support only along with much of the Japanese navy. Zuikaku, Shokaku, Akagi, and Kaga will be ready for action, with most damage repaired in 10 days. Hiryu and Soryu will be ready for action in 20 days, though both will have to make do with a few points of residual flood damage.

A mixed group of 4 CAs (Furutaka and Myoko Class) has moved back into the New Caledonia region to begin bombarding the allied position at Noumea. The Koumac airfield is now size 5 and operating 72 Betties and 90 A6M2s. I am beginning work on a small airfield at La Foa, adjacent to Noumea for CAP over my ground forces. I also intend to station an AKE here to replenish bombardment groups and allow them to bombard Noumea daily from 1 space away, so CAP here will also be necessary to cover the CAs and AKE.

Until Noumea falls, further advances in SoPac or Australia are on hold, as I only have 2 divisions available for further advance, which is insufficient to begin an Australian campaign... or a New Zealand campaign in lieu of the Australian campaign. I have been toying with the idea of taking New Zealand, in conjunction with establishing bases on Cocos Island and Port Hudson, to completely cut U.S. reinforcements off from Australian and force a major CV battle in 1942.

< Message edited by Aurorus -- 12/20/2017 6:36:32 PM >

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 175

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 12/20/2017 6:44:43 PM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

The current situation in China. I saw a target of opportunity to take the hex next to Changsha with newly formed divisions that had been assembled from brigades in Wuchang and Henchow. The idea is to threaten Changsha and pin a large number of Chinese forces down in this area to defend the road and rail-lines and prevent Apbarog from reinforcing the south, where 4 heavily reinforced Japanese division are now moving on Kweilin.

Brigade-level units and a few divisions are moving to gain control of the hexsides all along the front in southern China and move into the x3 terrain along the road and rail-line to south China.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Aurorus -- 12/20/2017 6:46:01 PM >

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 176

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 12/20/2017 6:53:10 PM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

Here is the state of Japanese naval air R&D. Japan is into the engine bonus on Nakajima 35s, with over 500 in the pool, so the A6M5 is acclerating rapidly. I have done nothing with the A6M3a. A size 15 factory will be constructed for the A6M3 in June from a factory currently producing Pete trainers. This A6M3 factory will upgrade to the A6M3a in December and then to the A6M5, where it will remain until the end of the 1944 (because several squadrons do not upgrade beyond the A6M5). One size 30 factory will go into production of the A6M5, once the A6M5 comes online, probably in June. This factory will upgrade to the A6M5b and then the A6M5c. 3 additional size 30 A6 factories will convert to production once the A6M8 is available in mid 1943. The 4 that remain will be converted to A7M2 R&D.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Aurorus -- 12/20/2017 7:17:43 PM >

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 177

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 12/20/2017 7:03:32 PM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

Here is page 1 of army fighter research. The Oscar factories are about to begin producing R&D and the Nick will be ready for produciton, as the final Nakajima 35 engine factories come online.

I put 4 factories on Tojo in this game. One factory will go into production immediately in May when the Tojo IIa is available. The other 3 will begin R&D on the IIb and then the IIc. There are only 100 Nakajima 34s in the pool. Production is expanding to 70 per month. (I decided, belatedly, to expand production from 50 to 70, and missed 2 months of increased production: so 40 engines). I will build out 30 Helen Ias to convert the one squadron that is able to Helens. I will then shut off Helen production so that the Nakajima 34 pool will build at a rate of 40 engines per month and begin providing an engine bonus in early 1943, which should make the Tojo IIc available in March or April of 1943.

Two factories, one size 30 and one size 50, are currently producing the Oscar 1C. The size 50 factory will convert to the Oscar IIa, while the size 30 will remain committed to the Oscar 1C until the Oscar IIb is available, at which point both factories will upgrade to the IIb. The reason to continue Oscar Ic production is because only 4 squadrons upgrade to the IIa. Once R&D on the Oscar IIb is complete, I think that I will convert the 4 Oscar factories to R&D for the Ki-95, depending upon avilable supplies.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Aurorus -- 12/20/2017 10:14:53 PM >

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 178

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 12/20/2017 7:29:36 PM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

Here is page 2 of army fighter R&D. I have 4 factories on Tony in this game, and I have 3 small engine (2 size 20 and a size 30) factories assigned to the Kawasaki. This is a DBB-specific issue, because DBB advances the availability date for several airframes (such as Tony), but not the availability date of the engine. I learned from my game with Opilot that if only 1 factory is assigned to Tony and increased to 60 or 70, it fails to generate R&D until February (while it is expanding), and the Kawasaki engine will not be available when the Tony is available. One Tony factory will convert to production once the Tony 1a is available. The other 3 will move on in R&D. I left one factory on the Tony 1c at size 5 because 1 squadron (and one squadron only) upgrades to the 1c before the 1d. What a waste of a good factory, but such is life in PDU:off.

I have 9 factories on the first generation Frank and Nakajima 45 production is expanding to 540 per month. These 9 factories will provide only 300 Franks per month, so some additional expansion will be necessary once the Frank comes into production, as I would like to produce about 480 Franks per month.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Aurorus -- 12/20/2017 10:07:29 PM >

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 179

RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A) - 12/20/2017 7:33:00 PM

Aurorus

Posts: 1314
Joined: 5/26/2014
Status: offline

Here is the current state of Nakajima 35 production. The C5M factory is about to convert to A6M2-Rufes.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Aurorus -- 12/20/2017 7:38:27 PM >

(in reply to Aurorus)

Post #: 180

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Argentina vs. USA: Aurorus (J) vs. Apbarog (A)