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: JFB in charge of the USN???

 
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: JFB in charge of the USN??? Page: <<   < prev  8 9 [10] 11 12   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/17/2017 7:07:02 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: traskott
Port size was my concern: fast transporte use to be big transports, so unload them will take forever. May be using small xAPs to move supply in map??

There is an idea. I will look into carrying capacities of all the 13-kt xAPs that have just finished conversions. Thanks! :)


_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to traskott)
Post #: 271
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/17/2017 7:36:48 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline 		I don't risk those 13 Kt xAPs with the 1000/1200 capacity - they are extremely useful when you start doing invasions. They can dock at a size 1 port, can carry a small unit (like Pt Svc Dets and CBs) and a few of them can carry a regiment easily. Most of all, they offload fairly quickly and can vamoose while your bigger ships are still unloading supply.
I use some of the bigger xAPs that have a fair amount of cargo capacity because they take too long to unload in an amphib operation (which is always under threat of enemy air and sea interdiction). Put them in a Transport TF so they will use some of their troop space for supplies.

_____________________________

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 Kitakami)
Post #: 272
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/18/2017 12:38:42 AM   
DOCUP


Posts: 3073
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline 		Your doing a great job. Your air losses seem good to me.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 273
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/19/2017 9:57:22 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: traskott
Port size was my concern: fast transporte use to be big transports, so unload them will take forever. May be using small xAPs to move supply in map??

The large, 20-kt French xAPs will be moving USA Inf Rgts from the East Coast to Cape Town for the short term at least. No need to worry about port size when doing that run :)


_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to traskott)
Post #: 274
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/19/2017 10:07:07 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline 		Jan 16th, 1942

An interesting turn, during which both my esteemed opponent and I had advances and setbacks. As I wrote a few posts ago, I shock attacked in Pegu, and pushed back a bridgehead there, with important Japanese losses. He will have to cross the river again, and will not be able to do so without important reinforcements.

But there was a minor Japanese success in Port Moresby. The Australian TF downloading troops and supplies there got attacked by Japanese CVE-based air. No Allied ships were sunk, but several will require dock time. It seems I am not being cautious enough and am doing too much outside air cover.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 275
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/19/2017 10:14:37 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline 		Air losses seem to continue favoring the allies, and I am at a loss why (I don't want it to happen to me when roles reverse). Could it be that Falken is fighting at too long a range? His sweeps seem to be doing OK, but his escorts are not.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 276
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/19/2017 10:20:07 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline 		I lost Siquijor, Salamalua and Tandjoengpinang last turn. Also lost a number of ships in KB's CarDiv mop-up ops west of Sumatra. I should have sailed west, instead of north. My opponent followed, and got more ships. Only 3 DDs survived from that TF. At least the two APs that can be later converted to APAs had already left.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 277
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/19/2017 10:23:36 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline 		If Tracker is to be believed (and I have found it to be more accurate that the game itself), I have destroyed about 200 more planes than I have lost. That is not bad at all!




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 278
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/19/2017 10:30:31 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline 		The DEI:
Besides the minor bases being lost, there has not been much action there on land. Hiryu and Soryu are a different story, of course. I wonder where are the other two CarDivs?

Malaya:
Only Fortress Singapore remains. Yet, I do not see my esteemed opponent moving in for the kill. What is he planning?

The Philippines:
Allied forces in Davao have retreated to Oroqueta, a Japanese base. Since it was empty, I will take it next turn, and then try to siphon off the little supply currently in Zamboanga. If I am successful, those troops might last just a bit longer.

Burma:
A quiet turn. I have sent a battalion from Pegu to Rangoon for R&R. Chinese infantry keeps moving towards the region.

China:
A few Japanese attacks, but nothing noteworthy.

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 279
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/19/2017 10:35:02 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline 		The Solomons, Papua New Guinea, and islands nearby:
Besides the Japanese air attack on the TF downloading in Port Moresby, the only noteworthy item is the transports that are still downloading troops in Luganville. AV is currently 284, which should be able to hold on against one IJN Assault Div. Need to fortify the place, though. This TF has no air cover. I am seriously considering sending some that way.

Lots of subs patrolling possible invasion sites, and several Catalina Sqdns doing their thing, but no major IJN forces detected.

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 280
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/21/2017 7:37:07 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline 		Jan 18th, 1942

Last turn saw much less activity on the ground, but a lot of activity in the air. Also, I now know where three out of the five carrier forces are. To add to that, IJA 38th Inf Div is currently being transported in no less than 17 ships towards Palembang (SigInt).

Anyways... IJN air attacked and sank minor units around Java, and land air sank a couple of launches trying to flee Singapore. Also, two previously bombed ships gave up the ghost.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 281
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/21/2017 7:40:53 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline 		In the air, few Allied pilots were killed, but many were wounded. I much prefer it this way than the other way around, of course. Losses go up whenever IJN flattops come around to play.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 282
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/21/2017 7:46:29 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline 		The problem with running out of fighters is that then enemy bombers can do whatever they wish... as long as one does not have good AAA. Mine is not what I'd like, but I did sneak in one 36x Bofors Rgt into Palembang, which does help. Did not dare to ship HAA, as it would eventually be destroyed, and I didn't want to lose it.

Still, air losses were in favor of the Allies once again, so one way or another I am making due with what I have.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 283
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/21/2017 7:48:51 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline 		Accumulated air losses are good. I just want to keep eroding IJN pilot quality.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 284
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/21/2017 8:12:15 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline 		Ok... now the juicy part.

The DEI:

The Hiryu and Soryu are covering the Palembang beach head from the south, while the CVLs seem to either be waiting for the transports or refueling in Miri. Either way, that is a lot of naval air I can't compete with.

What I am planning to do, is to order an alpha strike as soon as I have the transports in range. I have kept my TBs, MBs, and HBs training, waiting for the next wave. Hopefully my fighters will last until then. I am certain I will not be able to destroy the transports before they hit the beaches, but I am sure going to try to sink them once they do, and I am going to pound the ground with all available level bombers at the same time. If I can disable enough enemy squads, I will be able to last a lot longer... or so I hope :)

There is also an amphibious landing that will hit either Tarakan or Tandjoengselor, probably this turn. Not much I can do there, except brace myself. There was no way I could reinforce Borneo. The only thing I did was to turn off all refineries, so there is not much fuel anywhere, except in Sumatra. Even Soerbaja, which has been the refueling point of Allied surface forces, is low on fuel.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Kitakami -- 11/21/2017 8:13:09 PM >

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 285
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/21/2017 8:25:45 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline 		Malaya:

Even with air attacks on Singapore, fort level is now at 3.51. I will stop at 4, I think, so that I can conserve some supply. The rest of the peninsula is now Japanese.

The Philippines:

Took Oroquieta back, and ordered supplies to be accumulated there. If the 500+ supplies that are in Zamboanga move to Oroquieta, my units will have something to eat for a little bit.

In Manila there are only 7.5K IJA troops, plus 100 guns and 40 or so vehicles. My esteemed opponent seems to be cleaning up everything else before focusing on Manila. Also, with the 38th IJA Inf Div absent, it will be a while before Manila is taken. Meanwhile fort lefel is 3.16 and rising.

Burma:

Another quiet turn.

China:

There was only one Japanese attack, in Chengchow. Supplies are low, and fort level was reduced to 2. It currently is 2.33. I know I will lose this battle. I only want industry there to be damaged along my units (146 engineers in the place).
quote:

Japanese Deliberate attack at Chengchow (88,44)
Japanese ground losses:
* 3044 casualties reported
*** Squads: 21 destroyed, 189 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 72 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 44 disabled
*** Guns lost 28 (1 destroyed, 27 disabled)
*** Vehicles lost 75 (1 destroyed, 74 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
* 1400 casualties reported
*** Squads: 15 destroyed, 30 disabled
*** Non Combat: 26 destroyed, 37 disabled
*** Engineers: 13 destroyed, 1 disabled
*** Guns lost 6 (1 destroyed, 5 disabled)


_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 286
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/21/2017 8:30:58 PM   
Zecke


Posts: 1330
Joined: 1/15/2005
From: Hitoeton
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kitakami

Ok... now the juicy part.

The DEI:

The Hiryu and Soryu are covering the Palembang beach head from the south, while the CVLs seem to either be waiting for the transports or refueling in Miri. Either way, that is a lot of naval air I can't compete with.

What I am planning to do, is to order an alpha strike as soon as I have the transports in range. I have kept my TBs, MBs, and HBs training, waiting for the next wave. Hopefully my fighters will last until then. I am certain I will not be able to destroy the transports before they hit the beaches, but I am sure going to try to sink them once they do, and I am going to pound the ground with all available level bombers at the same time. If I can disable enough enemy squads, I will be able to last a lot longer... or so I hope :)

There is also an amphibious landing that will hit either Tarakan or Tandjoengselor, probably this turn. Not much I can do there, except brace myself. There was no way I could reinforce Borneo. The only thing I did was to turn off all refineries, so there is not much fuel anywhere, except in Sumatra. Even Soerbaja, which has been the refueling point of Allied surface forces, is low on fuel.





Nice looking next time Brunei and Miri over 1943-44 take

Balikpapan and tarakan also i take late 42

< Message edited by Zecke -- 11/21/2017 8:36:04 PM >

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 287
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/21/2017 8:33:38 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline 		The Solomons, Papua New Guinea, and islands nearby:

The Aus transport TF successfully fled Port Moresby, even though the IJN CVE TF moved to intercept. I am going to try to intercept that TF. Range is a little far, I only have 1 hex of wiggling room, but I will try. If the CVEs remain in place (possible) or move W/SW (unlikely), they will face a nasty surprise. If they retreat, well... them be the breaks!




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 288
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/23/2017 1:54:10 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		Warning: When you normally capture a base with Heavy Industry (HI), half of it is destroyed. However, if the base is empty of enemy troops or auto flips to Japan then it is totally destroyed [down to (0)1]. I had that happen to me at many bases in southern India. I'm posting this in both AARs. I would suggest that any base with HI have to have some Allied troops there to prevent this.

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 289
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/23/2017 1:57:04 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants
Warning: When you normally capture a base with Heavy Industry (HI), half of it is destroyed. However, if the base is empty of enemy troops or auto flips to Japan then it is totally destroyed [down to (0)1]. I had that happen to me at many bases in southern India. I'm posting this in both AARs. I would suggest that any base with HI have to have some Allied troops there to prevent this.


Hmm... not kosher. I will make it a point NOT to abandon a base with HI if I can avoid it. Need to look at Java mostly, as China, India and Manila are garrisoned.


_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 290
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/23/2017 2:00:03 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline 		Preview for next turn:

IJA 38th Inf Div landed in Palembang over the last turn, and has an AV of 330+. Don't have the turn yet, but the combat report showed it.

Also, there was a Japanese bombardment attack in Manila, and over 3k IJA troops were disabled. I wonder if an Allied deliberate attack would be in order? If there are still only a bit over 6k enemy troops there, it just might...

Will write more whn I get the turn.

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 291
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/23/2017 2:27:34 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		Manila: You need to resist the temptation to attack here and in many other places. Why? Just looking at Assault Value doesn't tell the whole story on what your actual combat power you have or not. Most Allied troop have below 50 in experience, so their AV is halved when attacking. Manila is Urban hex. Look at your Filipino troops show this. On Luzon, I almost never attack as Allies because of this and the need to conserve supplies. Your Chinese, Indian, and Aussie troops are in the same boat.

Hit the "D" button to pull up the database. Select Infantry. Look at your current and future Anti-Soft and Anti-Armor values for your infantry troops. It's not until the '43 squads come out that they really pack significant punch and are ready to take on the Japanese.

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 292
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/23/2017 3:08:51 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants
Manila: You need to resist the temptation to attack here and in many other places. Why? Just looking at Assault Value doesn't tell the whole story on what your actual combat power you have or not. Most Allied troop have below 50 in experience, so their AV is halved when attacking. Manila is Urban hex. Look at your Filipino troops show this. On Luzon, I almost never attack as Allies because of this and the need to conserve supplies. Your Chinese, Indian, and Aussie troops are in the same boat.

Hit the "D" button to pull up the database. Select Infantry. Look at your current and future Anti-Soft and Anti-Armor values for your infantry troops. It's not until the '43 squads come out that they really pack significant punch and are ready to take on the Japanese.


Good points on experience, anti-soft, and anti-armour. I will refrain. Thanks!


_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 293
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/23/2017 8:32:39 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		You are using a lovely map. Who's is it and what is the map specifically? (I know ChemKid has several this is why I ask.)

_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 294
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/23/2017 8:35:52 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
You are using a lovely map. Who's is it and what is the map specifically? (I know ChemKid has several this is why I ask.)

It is one of his, you have a good eye :)
As to which one, I do not recall. You will have to go to his thread and check all versions out. Sorry, I really do not remember which one it is :/


_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 295
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/25/2017 5:06:08 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline 		A question for the peanut gallery:

I have a fighter unit in Palembang. I want to defend bombers coming from other bases to bomb Japanese units in Palembang. What orders should I give those fighters? I guess I am a little rusty :)

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 296
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/25/2017 5:46:34 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline 		If you own Palembang, just set your fighters on CAP and they will oppose any enemy fighters that show up.

_____________________________

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 Kitakami)
Post #: 297
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/25/2017 5:49:33 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
If you own Palembang, just set your fighters on CAP and they will oppose any enemy fighters that show up.


Just to be clear... I do not want to mess this one up. All the fighters based in Palembang on CAP, and all other fighters nearby on escort?


_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 298
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/25/2017 6:55:05 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kitakami

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
If you own Palembang, just set your fighters on CAP and they will oppose any enemy fighters that show up.


Just to be clear... I do not want to mess this one up. All the fighters based in Palembang on CAP, and all other fighters nearby on escort?


Now I am not clear about what you mean by "other fighters nearby".
Fighter missions that can do CAP are "Escort" and "Sweep".
If you set the mission Escort, range 0 and the CAP % to 50%, half your fighters will stay at the base to do CAP and the other half will be available to escort bombers if there are any leaving from the base or nearby bases. If there are no bomber mission to escort, 50% of the aircraft will start off the first CAP cycle of the day while the other half rest. When the first half come down to refuel/rearm, the second half will go up to replace them. And so it cycles to day's end.

If your "nearby fighters" are one hex away you could set them to CAP with range 1 and some of them will help out with CAP at the original base, but some will also be patrolling other hexes on adjoining hex sides. You can set LRCAP to get them to exclusively go to the original base.

If there are bombers flying but you don't want CAP to escort from a base, set a Sweep mission range 0 and then set the CAP % and target hex.

_____________________________

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 Kitakami)
Post #: 299
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 11/25/2017 8:36:45 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
Now I am not clear about what you mean by "other fighters nearby".
Fighter missions that can do CAP are "Escort" and "Sweep".
If you set the mission Escort, range 0 and the CAP % to 50%, half your fighters will stay at the base to do CAP and the other half will be available to escort bombers if there are any leaving from the base or nearby bases. If there are no bomber mission to escort, 50% of the aircraft will start off the first CAP cycle of the day while the other half rest. When the first half come down to refuel/rearm, the second half will go up to replace them. And so it cycles to day's end.

If your "nearby fighters" are one hex away you could set them to CAP with range 1 and some of them will help out with CAP at the original base, but some will also be patrolling other hexes on adjoining hex sides. You can set LRCAP to get them to exclusively go to the original base.

If there are bombers flying but you don't want CAP to escort from a base, set a Sweep mission range 0 and then set the CAP % and target hex.


The airfields I mentioned as "nearby" are 5-7 hexes distant. So I am flying escort with the (few) fighters I have in those airfields.


_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 300
Page:   <<   < prev  8 9 [10] 11 12   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? Page: <<   < prev  8 9 [10] 11 12   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

5.047