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  12 13 [14] 15 16   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/8/2017 3:13:55 PM   
Kitakami


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

If I thought defending Manila was going to be easier than defending Bataan, I was sorely mistaken. In retrospective, I should not have vacated Clark Field when I did, as the base is a very strong defensive position. Had I waited, the Bataan fortress would have remained operational for a few more turns.

Still, trying to hold on for as long as possible.

Japanese Bombardment attack at Manila (79,77) DAY ONE

Japanese ground losses:
* 248 casualties reported
*** Squads: 3 destroyed, 17 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Allied ground losses:
* 8 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Night Naval bombardment of Manila at 79,77 DAT TWO

Allied aircraft losses
* P-40B Warhawk: 8 damaged
* P-40B Warhawk: 1 destroyed on ground
* Stearman 75M: 2 damaged
* SOC-1 Seagull: 2 damaged
* O-47A: 1 damaged
Japanese Ships
* BB Hyuga
* CL Yubari
* CL Nagara
Allied ground losses:
* 57 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
*** Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 10 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
*** Guns lost 3 (1 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Airbase hits 6
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 32
Port hits 1
Port fuel hits 1

Ise did not bombard, and that was before she hit the third mine.

Japanese Bombardment attack at Manila (79,77) DAY TWO

Japanese ground losses:
* 165 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 21 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Allied ground losses:
* 46 casualties reported
*** Squads: 1 destroyed, 4 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
*** Vehicles lost 3 (1 destroyed, 2 disabled)

(capture is before day 2's attack)




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 391
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/8/2017 3:26:09 PM   
Kitakami


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

This is where I feel Allied air power will be felt the most, at least for now. Locally based fighters are sweeping the combat hex, while heavy bombers based in India are getting some on the job training. Not great results on the bombing yet, but they will get there.

Morning Air attack on 33rd Division, at 56,52 , near Pegu DAY ONE

Allied aircraft
* B-17D Fortress x 4
* B-17E Fortress x 12
Allied aircraft losses
* B-17D Fortress: 1 damaged
Japanese ground losses:
* 86 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
*** Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 3 disabled

Morning Air attack on 144th Infantry Regiment, at 56,52 , near Pegu DAY ONE

Allied aircraft
* LB-30 Liberator x 6
Japanese ground losses:
* 29 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

Japanese Bombardment attack at 56,52 (near Pegu) DAY ONE

Japanese ground losses:
* 43 casualties reported
*** Squads: 1 destroyed, 3 disabled
Allied ground losses:
* 10 casualties reported
*** Squads: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled

Morning Air attack on 33rd Division, at 56,52 , near Pegu DAY TWO

Allied aircraft
* B-17D Fortress x 4
* B-17E Fortress x 6
Allied aircraft losses
* B-17D Fortress: 2 damaged
Japanese ground losses:
* 82 casualties reported
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
*** Engineers: 1 destroyed, 1 disabled

Morning Air attack on 33rd Division, at 56,52 , near Pegu DAY TWO

Allied aircraft
* B-17E Fortress x 6
Japanese ground losses:
* 25 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled

Japanese Bombardment attack at 56,52 (near Pegu) DAY TWO


Japanese ground losses:
* 20 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Allied ground losses:
* 18 casualties reported
*** Squads: 1 destroyed, 2 disabled

(capture is before day 2's attack)



Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Kitakami -- 12/8/2017 3:27:39 PM >


_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 392
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/8/2017 3:36:03 PM   
Kitakami


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

The flurry of activity the game began with has quieted down into more focused Japanese attacks. Front has not stabilized yet, but my stationing troops in harm's way in specific points, I have thrown my esteemed opponent off his expected timeline. As someone wrote here, for some Chinese troops dying and being resurrected in Chungking is actually an upgrade!

Japanese Deliberate attack at Chuhsien (88,56) DAY ONE

Japanese ground losses:
* 291 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 49 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Allied ground losses:
* 551 casualties reported
*** Squads: 3 destroyed, 33 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 11 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 6 disabled

What does worry me is that I had an advantage in numbers. Chinese troops here have low experience, true, but they are well-entrenched, and in good terrain. We will see what develops.

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 393
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/8/2017 3:40:31 PM   
Kitakami


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

Not much action here. The Hvy. CarDiv. is once again out of sight, probably sailing towards Truk for fuel and plane replacements. I wish I had had a clear opportunity against it, but I did not see one.

Central/South Pacific:

The Hvy. CarDiv is still hunting these waters. I had to re route some convoys, as two-day turns do tend to play havoc with mental images of how far a TF can sail. But no damage done, at least not last turn.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 394
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/11/2017 12:37:23 AM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline
Feb 7th, 1942

A somewhat uneventful turn, with no losses at sea from either side. Yet, as I tried to fly CAP over Manila, my pilots were mauled (one ace dead, four aces wounded). I think I will have to stop any pretense of air defense there.

Tabar Island and Gorong were lost, but no other serious Japanese advances except in Celebes, at least for now.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 395
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/11/2017 12:41:33 AM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline
Air losses are in the Allies favor, even with the losses in Manila.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 396
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/11/2017 1:13:19 AM   
Kitakami


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

There was a respite as the Japanese did not attack Singapore on the ground. There are over 175 disrupted Allied squads in the base, so any respite helps bring those back into the battle lines. A losing battle, but one that has lasted almost to the historical point, and has caused heavier losses to the IJA than was done historically (or at least that is my perception).

The DEI:

Even though I had patrol and torpedo planes set to night missions, the torpedo planes did not fly, even at range zero. If anyone can shed some light on this, I'd appreciate it. Still, the Allied guns at the base did their best against the landings of the 21st Mixed Bde. Such a large reinforcement will strengthen the Japanese position enormously.

Pre-Invasion action off Palembang (48,91)

Japanese ground losses:
* 311 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 10 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 16 disabled
Allied ground losses:
* 58 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled

Amphibious Assault at Palembang (48,91)

Japanese ground losses:
* 119 casualties reported
*** Squads: 6 destroyed, 0 disabled
*** Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled

Invasion Support action off Palembang (48,91)

Japanese ground losses:
* 150 casualties reported
*** Non Combat: 11 destroyed, 3 disabled
Allied ground losses:
* 11 casualties reported
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

Allied Bombardment attack at Palembang (48,91)

Japanese ground losses:
* 13 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Allied ground losses:
* 23 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled


_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 397
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/11/2017 1:42:02 AM   
Kitakami


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

Manila is still very much a thorn on the Japanese side. Losses last turn were unexpected. I am certain the battle wagons will return, though, and that will eventually spell the end of supply in Manila. Then the end will come.

Japanese Deliberate attack at Manila (79,77) DAY ONE

Japanese ground losses:
* 6312 casualties reported
*** Squads: 81 destroyed, 203 disabled
*** Non Combat: 4 destroyed, 96 disabled
*** Engineers: 36 destroyed, 61 disabled
*** Guns lost 49 (6 destroyed, 43 disabled)
*** Vehicles lost 38 (3 destroyed, 35 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
* 395 casualties reported
*** Squads: 1 destroyed, 60 disabled
*** Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 20 disabled
*** Engineers: 1 destroyed, 8 disabled
*** Guns lost 12 (1 destroyed, 11 disabled)

Japanese Bombardment attack at Manila (79,77) DAY TWO

Japanese ground losses:
* 61 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
*** Guns lost 2 (1 destroyed, 1 disabled)
*** Vehicles lost 2 (1 destroyed, 1 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
* 26 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled

Although not as solid a defense as Manila, Cebu is proving not to be a pushover either. The 1st IJA Para Assault Div is trying to conquer the base, but it will not be immediate:

Japanese Deliberate attack at Cebu (80,86) DAY ONE

Japanese ground losses:
* 333 casualties reported
*** Squads: 1 destroyed, 36 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Allied ground losses:
* 293 casualties reported
*** Squads: 1 destroyed, 23 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled

Allied Bombardment attack at Cebu (80,86) DAY ONE

Japanese ground losses:
* 20 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled

Allied Bombardment attack at Cebu (80,86) DAY TWO

Japanese ground losses:
* 62 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled


_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 398
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/11/2017 1:59:02 AM   
Kitakami


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

The line seems to be holding. There is one reinforcing Japanese unit crossing the river, but I am also sending reinforcements that way. If Singapore holds just a bit more, I just might have a chance to hold things well.

Japanese Bombardment attack at 56,52 (near Pegu) DAY ONE

Japanese ground losses:
* 63 casualties reported
*** Squads: 1 destroyed, 2 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

Morning Air attack on 33rd Division, at 56,52 , near Pegu DAY TWO

Allied aircraft
* B-17D Fortress x 4
Allied aircraft losses
* B-17D Fortress: 1 damaged
Japanese ground losses:
* 21 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled

Morning Air attack on 112th Infantry Regiment, at 56,52 , near Pegu DAY TWO

Allied aircraft
* LB-30 Liberator x 6
Japanese ground losses:
* 37 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled

Morning Air attack on 112th Infantry Regiment, at 56,52 , near Pegu DAY TWO

Allied aircraft
* B-17E Fortress x 6
Japanese ground losses:
* 35 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled

Japanese Bombardment attack at 56,52 (near Pegu) DAY TWO

Japanese ground losses:
* 50 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Allied ground losses:
* 26 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
*** Vehicles lost 2 (1 destroyed, 1 disabled)

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 399
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/11/2017 2:06:11 AM   
Kitakami


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

Japanese attacks in China have slowed down, and last turn only one base was attacked by land.

Japanese Deliberate attack at Chuhsien (88,56) DAY ONE

Japanese ground losses:
* 868 casualties reported
*** Squads: 2 destroyed, 141 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
Allied ground losses:
* 113 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 12 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 400
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/11/2017 2:10:05 AM   
Kitakami


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

The two heavy IJN CarDivs that have been prowling the area have disappeared from sight. I will be cautious, but I need to get large amounts of oil to Australia. The next few weeks will be very important in this regard.

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 401
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/11/2017 8:21:46 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline
Feb 9th, 1942

A somewhat uneventful turn, which is the calm that precedes the storm, as the Nagato and Mutsu are patiently waiting for mines to be cleared in Manila itself before continuing their bombardment. Japanese pressure is mounting up in Singapore, Palembang, and Manila, and all three dikes will eventually break. Burma is not as complicated, and also is the one theater where reinforcements are quite likely.

Pilot losses are light, but MIA pilots make nervous, even if they were lost flying over a friendly hex.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Kitakami -- 12/11/2017 8:25:43 PM >


_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 402
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/11/2017 8:23:15 PM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline
Air losses continue to favor the Allies. If pilots are being lost along the airframes, I am doing better than expected.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 403
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/11/2017 9:12:34 PM   
Kitakami


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

Guiuan, Iloilo, Little Andaman, Buna, Madjene, and Watampone.


Malaya:

My esteemed opponent decided to run the gauntlet at Singapore, if I understand correctly to supply units somewhere, probably in Burma. The result was not pretty, from the Japanese point of view:

TF 54 encounters mine field at Singapore (50,84) - Coastal Guns Fire Back!

Japanese Ships
* DMS W-12, Shell hits 9, heavy fires, heavy damage
* DMS W-6, Shell hits 8, heavy fires, heavy damage
* DMS W-3, Shell hits 6, heavy fires, heavy damage

Naval Gun Fire at Singapore - Coastal Guns Fire Back!

Japanese Ships
* DD Ayanami, Shell hits 5, heavy fires, heavy damage
* DD Shikinami, Shell hits 3, Mine hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
* AK Tosan Maru, Shell hits 4, Mine hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
* AK Kinka Maru, Shell hits 3, Mine hits 1, on fire
* AK Sasako Maru, Shell hits 5, Mine hits 1, heavy fires
Allied ground losses:
* 11 casualties reported
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

TF 123 encounters mine field at Singapore (50,84)

Japanese Ships
* DD Ayanami, Mine hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
* DD Shikinami, Mine hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
* AK Tosan Maru, Mine hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage

I think a few of those ships are now swimming with Davey Jones.

There was also another Japanese attack in Singapore. Although fort level is now at 2.12, I am not certain that Falken has enough fresh forces to exploit the fact.

Japanese Deliberate attack at Singapore (50,84) DAY ONE

Japanese ground losses:
* 4260 casualties reported
*** Squads: 41 destroyed, 279 disabled
*** Non Combat: 18 destroyed, 37 disabled
*** Engineers: 11 destroyed, 76 disabled
*** Guns lost 33 (4 destroyed, 29 disabled)
*** Vehicles lost 56 (32 destroyed, 24 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
* 1743 casualties reported
*** Squads: 22 destroyed, 130 disabled
*** Non Combat: 4 destroyed, 52 disabled
*** Engineers: 4 destroyed, 15 disabled
*** Guns lost 54 (6 destroyed, 48 disabled)
*** Vehicles lost 21 (1 destroyed, 20 disabled)

Japanese Bombardment attack at Singapore (50,84) DAY TWO

Japanese ground losses:
* 6 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
*** Guns lost 13 (1 destroyed, 12 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
* 26 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
*** Engineers: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
*** Vehicles lost 5 (2 destroyed, 3 disabled)


The DEI:

Combat at Palembang is beginning to tell. Although Japanese losses were higher, the Allies lost more combat squads, which is not good in the current situation. Still, the IJA is bleeding here.

Japanese Deliberate attack at Palembang (48,91) DAY ONE

Japanese ground losses:
* 2580 casualties reported
*** Squads: 19 destroyed, 58 disabled
*** Non Combat: 41 destroyed, 10 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 14 disabled
*** Guns lost 26 (14 destroyed, 12 disabled)
*** Vehicles lost 2 (1 destroyed, 1 disabled)
* Units destroyed 1
Allied ground losses:
* 774 casualties reported
*** Squads: 42 destroyed, 31 disabled
*** Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 22 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
*** Guns lost 12 (8 destroyed, 4 disabled)

Japanese Bombardment attack at Singapore (50,84) DAY TWO

Japanese ground losses:
* 6 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
*** Guns lost 13 (1 destroyed, 12 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
* 26 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
*** Engineers: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
*** Vehicles lost 5 (2 destroyed, 3 disabled)

Allied Bombardment attack at Palembang (48,91) DAY TWO

Japanese ground losses:
* 16 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
*** Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
Allied ground losses:
* 42 casualties reported
*** Squads: 2 destroyed, 1 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

Fort level is at 2.20. We will see if it is enough to wear the 21st Ind Bde.

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 404
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/11/2017 9:42:57 PM   
Kitakami


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

The Bataan minefield is gone. Only the Manila minefield remains. Sadly, I do not think it will last more than two turns. Then the bombardments will resume. Meanwhile...

Japanese Deliberate attack at Iloilo (79,84) DAY ONE
Japanese forces CAPTURE Iloilo !!!

Japanese ground losses:
* 31 casualties reported
*** Squads: 1 destroyed, 2 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Allied ground losses:
* 1050 casualties reported
*** Squads: 92 destroyed, 0 disabled
*** Non Combat: 23 destroyed, 0 disabled
Units destroyed 3

Japanese Bombardment attack at Manila (79,77) DAY ONE

Japanese ground losses:
*** Guns lost 9 (1 destroyed, 8 disabled)
*** Vehicles lost 3 (1 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
* 40 casualties reported
*** Squads: 1 destroyed, 2 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
*** Vehicles lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled)

Japanese Bombardment attack at Manila (79,77) DAY TWO

Japanese ground losses:
*** Guns lost 8 (1 destroyed, 7 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
* 46 casualties reported
*** Squads: 1 destroyed, 5 disabled


Burma:

Besides the air war, which will escalate, I am sure, combat is restricted to artillery exchanges. I don't complain at all, as it might allow me to reinforce with more Western troops. We will see if there is time. Meanwhile, the Chinese garrison of Lashio is in place, and the Chinese forces assigned to Myitkina are well on their way to get there. Those are probably the only Chinese forces I changed the future target of. Lashio's forces are in their high seventies at this point.

Japanese Bombardment attack at 56,52 (near Pegu) DAY ONE

Japanese ground losses:
* 29 casualties reported
*** Squads: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Allied ground losses:
* 5 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
*** Vehicles lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled)

Morning Air attack on 33rd Division, at 56,52 , near Pegu DAY TWO

Allied aircraft
* B-17E Fortress x 12
* LB-30 Liberator x 6
Japanese ground losses:
* 74 casualties reported
*** Squads: 1 destroyed, 6 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled

Japanese Bombardment attack at 56,52 (near Pegu) DAY TWO

Japanese ground losses:
* 48 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 8 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Allied ground losses:
* 12 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled

< Message edited by Kitakami -- 12/11/2017 10:01:50 PM >


_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 405
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/11/2017 9:56:22 PM   
Kitakami


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

The supply situation in China is tight, but at least it is not terrible while the Burma road is open. Over 700 Chinese squads plus 25 MMG sections have been absorbed by Chinese infantry units, and only one Chinese corps has been destroyed so far.

Japanese Deliberate attack at Chuhsien (88,56) DAY ONE

Japanese ground losses:
* 420 casualties reported
*** Squads: 2 destroyed, 63 disabled
*** Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 6 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
*** Guns lost 15 (1 destroyed, 14 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
* 391 casualties reported
*** Squads: 1 destroyed, 36 disabled
*** Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 4 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled


The Pacific:

The sitzkrieg has moved to the Pacific. With the exception of a sub sighted one hex SW of Attu (which in itself is quite telling), there are no sightings of interest.


_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 406
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/11/2017 10:51:50 PM   
Dirtnap86


Posts: 95
Joined: 10/3/2016
Status: offline
I'm amazed he risked his true AKs to try and ram supply into Singapore. All he'd really have to do is drop it off at Mersing and wait a couple days. He only gets a handful of those puppies and he just...threw em away.

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 407
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/12/2017 12:22:49 AM   
Kitakami


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

ORIGINAL: Dirtnap86
I'm amazed he risked his true AKs to try and ram supply into Singapore. All he'd really have to do is drop it off at Mersing and wait a couple days. He only gets a handful of those puppies and he just...threw em away.

I do not think the TF was bound for Singapore. Also, I believe he did not know that merely passing through would engage the onshore batteries.

Do remember that this is his first game as Japan. What he did in Singapore I did twice, once in Singapore and once in Bataan, until I learned my lesson. There are things that take a bit to sink in.


_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Dirtnap86)
Post #: 408
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/12/2017 3:44:54 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kitakami

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dirtnap86
I'm amazed he risked his true AKs to try and ram supply into Singapore. All he'd really have to do is drop it off at Mersing and wait a couple days. He only gets a handful of those puppies and he just...threw em away.

I do not think the TF was bound for Singapore. Also, I believe he did not know that merely passing through would engage the onshore batteries.

Do remember that this is his first game as Japan. What he did in Singapore I did twice, once in Singapore and once in Bataan, until I learned my lesson. There are things that take a bit to sink in.



I once tried to force the issue by BOMBARDING Singers with BBs. Did that ONCE! Never, ever again. AKs?!! Not good whatsoever...


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 409
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/12/2017 4:30:31 PM   
Kitakami


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

ORIGINAL: John 3rd
I once tried to force the issue by BOMBARDING Singers with BBs. Did that ONCE! Never, ever again. AKs?!! Not good whatsoever...


Those five 15-inchers are nothing to laugh at, and they are ably seconded by six 9.2-inchers... and EIGHTEEN 6-inchers. I have learned NOT to try to get anything through that hex until Singapore is conquered.

In this game, though, my esteemed opponent is getting desperate. He did good time in Hong Kong, but is running late in Singapore, Manila and, perhaps, Palembang.


_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 410
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/14/2017 2:07:08 AM   
Kitakami


Posts: 1302
Joined: 5/3/2002
From: The bridge of the DNTK Kitakami
Status: offline
Feb. 11th, 1942:

Japanese land attacks were not as bad as I feared, but one of these turns I will be evicted from (or surrender at) most important bases that are being contested right now.

I lost Pontianak, Kaimana, Galeia and Namlea, and the last remaining xAKL trying to flee Manila was finally sunk. There is one severely damaged SS in Manila port, but at 96 sys damage, it will sink as soon as it leaves her berth. Zero pilot losses (no MIA, no WIA, no KIA) was the highlight of the turn. That, and that airframe losses were 26 to 2 in my favour.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Kitakami -- 12/14/2017 2:10:16 AM >


_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 411
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/14/2017 2:23:49 AM   
Kitakami


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

Japanese Deliberate attack at Singapore (50,84) DAY ONE


Japanese ground losses:
* 3486 casualties reported
*** Squads: 85 destroyed, 127 disabled
*** Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 27 disabled
*** Engineers: 2 destroyed, 12 disabled
*** Guns lost 26 (2 destroyed, 24 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
* 954 casualties reported
*** Squads: 5 destroyed, 31 disabled
*** Non Combat: 35 destroyed, 38 disabled
*** Engineers: 2 destroyed, 6 disabled
*** Guns lost 11 (2 destroyed, 9 disabled)
*** Vehicles lost 23 (9 destroyed, 14 disabled)

Japanese Bombardment attack at Singapore (50,84) DAY TWO

Japanese ground losses:
* 34 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Allied ground losses:
* 66 casualties reported
*** Squads: 2 destroyed, 12 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

Allied losses are beginning to mount up. Looking at the result of the artillery bombardment, I believe that Fortress Singapore will not last the month, sadly.


The DEI:

Japanese Deliberate attack at Palembang (48,91) DAY ONE

Japanese ground losses:
* 1681 casualties reported
*** Squads: 60 destroyed, 103 disabled
*** Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 12 disabled
*** Engineers: 8 destroyed, 6 disabled
*** Guns lost 25 (5 destroyed, 20 disabled)
*** Vehicles lost 9 (1 destroyed, 8 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
* 301 casualties reported
*** Squads: 5 destroyed, 20 disabled
*** Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 8 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
*** Guns lost 8 (1 destroyed, 7 disabled)

Interesting that the Japanese did NOT bombard on day two. Are they that exhausted?

Japanese Shock attack at 67,93 (near Tandjoengselor) DAY TWO

Japanese ground losses:
* 72 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 18 disabled
*** Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
Allied ground losses:
* 134 casualties reported
*** Squads: 1 destroyed, 18 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled

A lost battle, from which I am trying to retreat in order... and failing miserably. I need the troops to move within range of patrol boat transport.

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 412
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/14/2017 2:38:50 AM   
Kitakami


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

Japanese Bombardment attack at Manila (79,77) DAY ONE

Japanese ground losses:
* Vehicles lost 2 (1 destroyed, 1 disabled)
Allied ground losses:
* 11 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

Japanese Bombardment attack at Manila (79,77) DAY TWO

Allied ground losses:
* 7 casualties reported
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

The Manila port minefield is gone. Next turn the real hurt will begin. It is now only a question of time. I believe this base won't last the month either.

Japanese Deliberate attack at Cebu (80,86) DAY ONE

Japanese ground losses:
* 194 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 24 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
*** Engineers: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
Allied ground losses:
* 80 casualties reported
*** Squads: 1 destroyed, 9 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
*** Engineers: 1 destroyed, 2 disabled

Another base where there is no Japanese bombardment on the second day. The 1st Para Assault Div is not getting killed, but at least it IS getting disabled.


China:

Japanese Deliberate attack at Chuhsien (88,56) DAY ONE

Japanese ground losses:
* 1465 casualties reported
*** Squads: 1 destroyed, 143 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 8 disabled
*** Engineers: 1 destroyed, 7 disabled
Allied ground losses:
* 253 casualties reported
*** Squads: 3 destroyed, 40 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 18 disabled
*** Engineers: 1 destroyed, 2 disabled

Japanese Deliberate attack at Wuchow (76,57) DAY ONE

Japanese ground losses:
* 1585 casualties reported
*** Squads: 6 destroyed, 115 disabled
*** Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 8 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 26 disabled
Allied ground losses:
* 897 casualties reported
*** Squads: 1 destroyed, 55 disabled
*** Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 12 disabled
*** Engineers: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled

Japanese Bombardment attack at Wuchow (76,57) DAY TWO

Allied ground losses:
* 64 casualties reported
*** Squads: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
*** Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 0 disabled

A question for the Peanut Gallery (TM): although I have been able to blunt the Japanese attacks in China so far, I disable lots of squads, but destroy many. Is that normal?

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 413
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/14/2017 2:42:58 AM   
Kitakami


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

The TF that I believe is KB Hvy CarDiv 3 has reappeared. I need to be careful, and/or I need to confront it. I have a CV Ftr group with about half of the airframes damaged. Otherwise, I would have already sailed to meet it.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 414
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/14/2017 4:24:28 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Get 'em!


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 415
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/14/2017 7:42:02 AM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
To speed up damaged air groups on CV repairing, i often have to transfer them to an AF with extra Aviation Support. The CV air group may have lots of planes that need 5 days to repair. That's a lie!! I get it done in a few days once ashore.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 416
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/14/2017 1:27:57 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
+1.
Even getting the CV into port suddenly gets the air groups repairing much faster. At sea I can never get the aircraft below 10 points damage from wear and tear of normal ops.

_____________________________

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 ny59giants)
Post #: 417
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/14/2017 3:43:33 PM   
Kitakami


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

ORIGINAL: ny59giants
To speed up damaged air groups on CV repairing, i often have to transfer them to an AF with extra Aviation Support. The CV air group may have lots of planes that need 5 days to repair. That's a lie!! I get it done in a few days once ashore.

I guess the problem was having 450+ planes in a base with only 150 or so AV support. I have now rectified the situation, and have that air group at a base (AF 8) with more support than planes. Hopefully I will have use of that group in a turn or two.

_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 418
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/14/2017 4:33:58 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
It would really help your viewers to have the raw AV with adjusted in your ground combat reports. Just seeing the casualties doesn't help me. Show the info above the casualties, please!

(in reply to Kitakami)
Post #: 419
RE: JFB in charge of the USN??? - 12/15/2017 12:50:49 PM   
Kitakami


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

ORIGINAL: ny59giants
It would really help your viewers to have the raw AV with adjusted in your ground combat reports. Just seeing the casualties doesn't help me. Show the info above the casualties, please!

I tried to avoid the text wall of death (TM). But if you consider that info would be useful, I will gladly include it.


_____________________________

Tenno Heika Banzai!

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 420
Page:   <<   < prev  12 13 [14] 15 16   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  12 13 [14] 15 16   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

2.391