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: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (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: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/12/2019 11:29:17 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline 		If he has enough supply he can spawn mini-subs there in groups of four or six (can't recall the batch size). There is a chance the subs you haven't engaged yet are mini-subs which are easy to kill in shallow waters, but once in a while they get lucky and find a willing recipient for their torpedo.

_____________________________

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 Mundy)
Post #: 241
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/12/2019 11:38:28 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline 		You get mini-subs in batches of four.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 242
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/13/2019 1:43:23 PM   
Bif1961


Posts: 2014
Joined: 6/26/2008
From: Phenix City, Alabama
Status: offline 		As you near the Island are you going to switch the float planes from the ships to be used for bombardment over to night recon of Wake?

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 243
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/13/2019 2:49:15 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline 		You can switch the planes over before you get into range. Just one will do for the entire fleet. Try to make sure that it is on the first ship bombarding otherwise it does not seem to work the best.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to Bif1961)
Post #: 244
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/14/2019 3:31:16 AM   
Mundy


Posts: 2869
Joined: 6/26/2002
From: Neenah
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bif1961

As you near the Island are you going to switch the float planes from the ships to be used for bombardment over to night recon of Wake?


I don't use bombardment groups for invasions. Embedding BBs with the transports always seems to deal out more hurt that way. When bombarding, I do always use FP recon.

06 Jan 1943

I think Steve saw the writing on the wall and withdrew his search planes from Wake, as now all my TFs are unspotted. They've been moving faster than expected, so landings will start tomorrow. I'll be sending the rest to Marcus soon, once Wake is fairly secure. I still want air cover for that part.

He probably won't expect that part. I'm putting plenty of planes on both these islands. My path to the Marianas should be more clear after this.

I'm still watching the south, as I'm uncertain if his carriers from the Solomons will challenge this.

_____________________________


(in reply to Bif1961)
Post #: 245
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/14/2019 11:29:38 PM   
Mundy


Posts: 2869
Joined: 6/26/2002
From: Neenah
Status: offline 		07 Jan 1943

Landings.

A bit bloody all around, but I should prevail.

quote:

Pre-Invasion action off Wake Island (136,98)
Defensive Guns engage approaching landing force

56 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
BB Resolution~
BB Ramillies~
BB Royal Sovereign~
BB Idaho
BB Nevada
BB Colorado
BB Maryland
CA New Orleans
CA Salt Lake City
CA Pensacola
CA Houston
DD Balch
DD Jarvis
DD Mugford
DD Helm
AP Ernest Hinds~+

Japanese ground losses:
1019 casualties reported
Squads: 4 destroyed, 31 disabled
Non Combat: 19 destroyed, 50 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 2 disabled
Guns lost 37 (15 destroyed, 22 disabled)
Vehicles lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
8 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

BB Resolution~ firing at Wake Coastal Gun Battalion
BB Ramillies~ firing at Wake Coastal Gun Battalion
BB Royal Sovereign~ firing at Maizuru 2nd SNLF
BB Idaho firing at Maizuru 2nd SNLF
BB Nevada firing at 44th Naval Guard Unit
BB Colorado firing at Maizuru 2nd SNLF
BB Maryland firing at 44th Naval Guard Unit
CA New Orleans firing at 34th JNAF AF Unit
CA Salt Lake City firing at Maizuru 2nd SNLF
CA Pensacola firing at 44th Naval Guard Unit
CA Houston firing at Maizuru 2nd SNLF
DD Balch firing at Maizuru 2nd SNLF
DD Jarvis firing at Maizuru 2nd SNLF
DD Mugford firing at Maizuru 2nd SNLF
DD Helm firing at Maizuru 2nd SNLF
DD Balch fired at enemy troops
Defensive Guns fire at approaching troops in landing craft at 4,000 yards
Defensive Guns fire at approaching troops in landing craft at 2,000 yards


quote:

Amphibious Assault at Wake Island (136,98)

TF 344 troops unloading over beach at Wake Island, 136,98

Allied ground losses:
1617 casualties reported
Squads: 4 destroyed, 167 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 85 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 41 (0 destroyed, 41 disabled)
Vehicles lost 22 (0 destroyed, 22 disabled)

10 Support troops lost in surf during unload of 24th Infantry Div /2
10 Support troops lost from landing craft during unload of 24th Infantry Div /3
18 troops of a USMC Const Eng Sq lost in surf during unload of 3rd Marine Div /2
12 troops of a M1917 MMG Section lost in surf during unload of 3rd Marine Div /4
12 troops of a USMC Rifle Squad 43 lost in surf during unload of 3rd Marine Div /6


quote:

Ground combat at Wake Island (136,98)

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 13051 troops, 309 guns, 139 vehicles, Assault Value = 717

Defending force 3985 troops, 63 guns, 1 vehicles, Assault Value = 100

Allied adjusted assault: 42

Japanese adjusted defense: 8

Allied assault odds: 5 to 1 (fort level 4)

Allied Assault reduces fortifications to 0

Combat modifiers
Defender: forts(+), disruption(-), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker: shock(+), leaders(-), disruption(-), supply(-)

Japanese ground losses:
1976 casualties reported
Squads: 72 destroyed, 37 disabled
Non Combat: 13 destroyed, 78 disabled
Engineers: 10 destroyed, 5 disabled
Guns lost 26 (18 destroyed, 8 disabled)
Vehicles lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
3180 casualties reported
Squads: 87 destroyed, 96 disabled
Non Combat: 10 destroyed, 7 disabled
Engineers: 36 destroyed, 5 disabled
Guns lost 44 (30 destroyed, 14 disabled)
Vehicles lost 14 (10 destroyed, 4 disabled)

Assaulting units:
24th Infantry Div /11
102nd Cmbt Engineer Regiment
3rd Marine Div /11

Defending units:
Maizuru 2nd SNLF
44th Naval Guard Unit
46th JNAF AF Unit
34th JNAF AF Unit
Wake Cst Gun Bn /3


One AP carrying the Wake support follow-on forces took a sub torp, but should survive. Glad it wasn't the Marcus group.

I'm sending the Marcus invaders onwards. Search planes in the Marshalls are covering everything south of Wake.

When this is all finished, I'm toying with the idea of sending all the battleships to bombard Truk. Be about a dozen BBs involved.

_____________________________


(in reply to Mundy)
Post #: 246
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/15/2019 3:14:44 AM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline 		Truk has a nasty naval fort and lots of mines. Don't set your bombardment to "Escorts bombard" or the coastal/DP batteries will inflict lots of damage on your ships. With just the BBs bombarding the 15,000 yard minimum range should avoid most hits from the coastal defences.
Embed lots of DMS in the bombardment TF.

_____________________________

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 Mundy)
Post #: 247
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/15/2019 7:50:42 PM   
Mundy


Posts: 2869
Joined: 6/26/2002
From: Neenah
Status: offline 		Thanks, I'll bear that in mind.

I tried invading Truk against KenchiSulla and that turned into a disaster. I have no intention of trying that again.

_____________________________


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 248
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/17/2019 1:48:16 AM   
Bif1961


Posts: 2014
Joined: 6/26/2008
From: Phenix City, Alabama
Status: offline 		He lost around 3,000 and you almost 5,000 I would say it was a bloody but successful landing I guess it couldn't be avioded. Did you land only after an afternoon landing instead of a morning landing?

(in reply to Mundy)
Post #: 249
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/17/2019 2:54:00 AM   
Mundy


Posts: 2869
Joined: 6/26/2002
From: Neenah
Status: offline 		Yeah, I think it was a later day landing.

_____________________________


(in reply to Bif1961)
Post #: 250
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/18/2019 8:52:57 PM   
Mundy


Posts: 2869
Joined: 6/26/2002
From: Neenah
Status: offline 		For those of you following Steve's side of the AAR. After being AWOL, I got an email.

He had a nasty storm whip through his area which killed his power and internet. He won't really be ready again until the 27th.

_____________________________


(in reply to Mundy)
Post #: 251
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/19/2019 7:36:41 AM   
LargeSlowTarget


Posts: 4443
Joined: 9/23/2000
From: Hessen, Germany - now living in France
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mundy

07 Jan 1943

Landings.

A bit bloody all around, but I should prevail.


No "The issue is in doubt" message from the beach?

_____________________________

AE Mod "Bottlenecks" UPDATED 01/2022

(in reply to Mundy)
Post #: 252
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/19/2019 10:49:48 PM   
Mundy


Posts: 2869
Joined: 6/26/2002
From: Neenah
Status: offline 		Not yet.



_____________________________


(in reply to LargeSlowTarget)
Post #: 253
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/20/2019 11:16:59 PM   
Mundy


Posts: 2869
Joined: 6/26/2002
From: Neenah
Status: offline 		08 Jan 1943

Wake falls without a fuss. Dropping two divisions seems to help. I'll get the troops out after all the supplies get unloaded. Follow-on support forces and aircraft will land next turn. He's made very little effort to develop this island, with port and airfield still at 1 each. The Marcus invaders are 7 hexes NNE of Wake and are unspotted. He may not have search planes at Marcus. No mini subs at Wake. They all look to be real subs. I beat one up a bit, inflicting 7 "soft" hits on it.

quote:

Ground combat at Wake Island (136,98)

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 17134 troops, 364 guns, 130 vehicles, Assault Value = 545

Defending force 2533 troops, 29 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 12

Allied adjusted assault: 248

Japanese adjusted defense: 2

Allied assault odds: 124 to 1 (fort level 0)

Allied forces CAPTURE Wake Island !!!

Combat modifiers
Defender: disruption(-), fatigue(-), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker: shock(+), leaders(-), disruption(-)

Japanese ground losses:
1698 casualties reported
Squads: 79 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 268 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 10 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 35 (35 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Units destroyed 5

Allied ground losses:
179 casualties reported
Squads: 5 destroyed, 8 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 3 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 3 (2 destroyed, 1 disabled)

Assaulting units:
24th Infantry Division
3rd Marine Division
102nd Cmbt Engineer Regiment

Defending units:
44th Naval Guard Unit
34th JNAF AF Unit
46th JNAF AF Unit
Maizuru 2nd SNLF
Wake Cst Gun Bn /3


My base force at Coal Harbor completed its overland trek to Victoria. I just left that base, as Coal Harbor seems to be the biggest supply sink in the game and I'm tired of shipping supply there all the time.

_____________________________


(in reply to Mundy)
Post #: 254
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/21/2019 5:02:34 PM   
Mundy


Posts: 2869
Joined: 6/26/2002
From: Neenah
Status: offline 		09 Jan 1943

Pushed my luck keeping my carriers near Wake. Hornet ate a sub torpedo. flt is around 40-ish. She's enroute to Pearl. It wouldn't surprise me if she's out until the Essexes show up.

Marcus troops should arrive in 4 days. They're unseen, so he has no idea what's about to hit.

Lots more amphib ships enroute to Pearl. It'll make the Marianas easier.

_____________________________


(in reply to Mundy)
Post #: 255
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/21/2019 5:18:56 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline 		What amphib ships are you referring to? I thought there were no APAs/AKAs until after the March 1943 upgrades?

_____________________________

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 Mundy)
Post #: 256
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/21/2019 6:05:32 PM   
Mundy


Posts: 2869
Joined: 6/26/2002
From: Neenah
Status: offline 		Things like LSTs and LCIs. I do consider regular APs and AKs "Assault Transports" unlike the ones with "x" in front of them.

_____________________________


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 257
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/23/2019 2:21:23 PM   
Mundy


Posts: 2869
Joined: 6/26/2002
From: Neenah
Status: offline 		10 January 1943

Things moving along. Marcus invaders still unseen. I think he'll have no clue what's happening until it happens.

Unloading is slow at Wake, being a level 1 port. I'm not sure if the aircraft I'm shipping over will be able to unload at all.

I sank one mini-sub at Wake. The only one I've seen so far. Hornet is clear of the area and still can make 17 kts. She has 15 sys and 44 flt. This will probably take awhile to fix.

I've left the CVE group with the ships unloading at Wake. The fleet CVs are moving towards Marcus. I'm hoping I catch some of his shipping in the area.

_____________________________


(in reply to Mundy)
Post #: 258
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/23/2019 7:30:50 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline 		If the Air Transport TF ships cannot individually dock at Wake, you should be able to off-load them at Midway or Johnson Is. and fly them in.

_____________________________

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 Mundy)
Post #: 259
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/24/2019 12:28:39 AM   
Mundy


Posts: 2869
Joined: 6/26/2002
From: Neenah
Status: offline 		Yeah, or maybe Eniwetonk.

_____________________________


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 260
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/24/2019 5:22:05 PM   
Mundy


Posts: 2869
Joined: 6/26/2002
From: Neenah
Status: offline 		11 Jan 1943

Moment of truth.

Subs are definitely improving. The tanker I hit was a big one, judging from the picture.

quote:

Sub attack near Babeldaob at 91,96

Japanese Ships
AMc Choun Maru #7, Torpedo hits 1, heavy damage
AMc Takasago Maru

Allied Ships
SS Spearfish~

SS Spearfish~ launches 2 torpedoes at AMc Choun Maru #7
AMc Takasago Maru fails to find sub, continues to search...
AMc Takasago Maru fails to find sub, continues to search...
AMc Takasago Maru fails to find sub, continues to search...
AMc Takasago Maru fails to find sub, continues to search...
AMc Takasago Maru fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub


quote:

Submarine attack near Soerabaja at 56,103

Japanese Ships
AO KM Uckermark, Torpedo hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage

Allied Ships
SS Scorpion

AO KM Uckermark is sighted by SS Scorpion
SS Scorpion launches 6 torpedoes


My carriers encountered a big cargo group at Marcus. Seems like a lot of supply to ship there. I tore them up pretty good. My invasion force is one hex away and are not spotted.

quote:

Morning Air attack on TF, near Marcus Island at 123,85

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid spotted at 40 NM, estimated altitude 15,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 15 minutes

Allied aircraft
F4F-3A Wildcat x 17
F4F-3 Wildcat x 17
F4F-4 Wildcat x 51
SBD-4 Dauntless x 36
SBD-3 Dauntless x 95
TBD-1 Devastator x 15
TBF-1 Avenger x 60

Allied aircraft losses
SBD-4 Dauntless: 1 damaged
SBD-3 Dauntless: 2 damaged
TBF-1 Avenger: 2 damaged

Japanese Ships
xAK Tihuku Maru, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAK Akasi Maru, Bomb hits 5, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
AKE Asaka Maru, Bomb hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAKL Sonobe Maru #2, Bomb hits 3, and is sunk
xAKL Mogami Maru #3, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk
xAKL Hayasaki*, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAK Tazan Maru, Bomb hits 3, Torpedo hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAK Yasuteru Maru, Bomb hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAK Ueizuru Maru, Bomb hits 3, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
xAK Victoria Maru, Bomb hits 10, and is sunk
PB Yahada Maru, Bomb hits 3, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk
PB Kyo Maru #2, Bomb hits 2, and is sunk
PB Chokai Maru, Bomb hits 3, and is sunk
E Hato, Bomb hits 1, on fire
xAK Kyokusei Maru, Bomb hits 3, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk
xAK Sugiyama Maru, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage
PB Shinko Maru #2, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk
PB Chiyo Maru #4, Bomb hits 7, and is sunk
PB Shonan Maru #2, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk

Aircraft Attacking:
8 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 4000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
14 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 4000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
15 x TBF-1 Avenger bombing from 5000 feet
Naval Attack: 2 x 500 lb SAP Bomb
8 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 4000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
8 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
15 x TBF-1 Avenger launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22.4in Mk 13 Torp.
4 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
6 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 4000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
15 x TBF-1 Avenger launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22.4in Mk 13 Torp.
4 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 4000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
4 x SBD-4 Dauntless releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
15 x TBD-1 Devastator launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22.4in Mk 13 Torp.
4 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
6 x SBD-4 Dauntless releasing from 4000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb GP Bomb
15 x TBF-1 Avenger launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22.4in Mk 13 Torp.
4 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 4000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
8 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
1 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
6 x SBD-4 Dauntless releasing from 4000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
4 x SBD-4 Dauntless releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb GP Bomb
6 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
4 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
4 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
4 x SBD-4 Dauntless releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
4 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
8 x SBD-4 Dauntless releasing from 10000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb GP Bomb
4 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 10000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
4 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 10000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
4 x SBD-4 Dauntless releasing from 10000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb

Heavy smoke from fires obscuring xAK Tihuku Maru
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring xAKL Sonobe Maru #2
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring xAKL Hayasaki*
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring xAK Yasuteru Maru
Massive explosion on xAK Yasuteru Maru
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring xAK Akasi Maru
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring xAK Victoria Maru
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring PB Chokai Maru
Shonan Maru #2 dead in the water ...
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring PB Chiyo Maru #4
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring xAK Kyokusei Maru
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring xAK Tazan Maru
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring E Hato
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring AKE Asaka Maru


As it turns out, two IJN carrier groups suddenly show up half way between Wake and Marcus. Mine are moving to intercept. I think this will be a fairly close fight. His ships were moving towards Wake. I still have my jeep carriers providing air cover, so they're not naked. One group is now loading my two divisions. Another is unloading supply. The aircraft delivery group is now headed to Eniwetok to unload. My oilers to the NE are moving away also.

Next turn should determine how I play for the next six months.

_____________________________


(in reply to Mundy)
Post #: 261
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/24/2019 8:42:28 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline 		Do your carrier aircraft have a day to rest up before you clash? If not, they will be carrying some fatigue that the IJ pilots presumably do not have. If the clash is next turn and the turn after that they will be practically ineffective on the third day of combat - at least in my experience the bomber pilots don't hit squat on the third day of continuous combat.

_____________________________

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 Mundy)
Post #: 262
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/24/2019 9:13:34 PM   
Mundy


Posts: 2869
Joined: 6/26/2002
From: Neenah
Status: offline 		Sorta a Catch-22 here, as I need to get them over so he doesn't smack all the Wake transports.

_____________________________


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 263
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/25/2019 1:30:34 PM   
Bif1961


Posts: 2014
Joined: 6/26/2008
From: Phenix City, Alabama
Status: offline 		So his KB, or elements thereof,showed up behind your main carrier fleet between you near Marcus and him near Wake, where your transports are reloading your successful invasion LCUs? Since you are about to land at Marcus does this mean then it will be left exposed if your main carrier fleet heads towards Wake to confront the KB? It seems you are torn between two lovers, the one at Wake and the one about to land at Marcus. Might it be when your carriers move towards Wake and leave the Marcus invasion fleet exposed another element/s will attack it?

(in reply to Mundy)
Post #: 264
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/25/2019 6:58:58 PM   
ChuckBerger

 

Posts: 278
Joined: 8/10/2006
Status: offline 		Bif1961, I don't think it's OK for you to be reading both sides of this AAR and offering tactical advice to both players. I'm sure you don't mean any harm, but really - you can't "speculate" about what fleets might be "left exposed" if you're reading the other side and know the other guy's plans and thoughts!

(in reply to Bif1961)
Post #: 265
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/25/2019 10:54:24 PM   
Mundy


Posts: 2869
Joined: 6/26/2002
From: Neenah
Status: offline 		12 Jan 1943

The mighty battle... that wasn't.

I was set for a big fight, but his carriers have vanished. Completely off the screens. I've got search planes covering much of the area, except, perhaps the northeast and it's possible he went there. My plane carriers at Wake I've set to go to Eniwetok (they're still unloading supply) want to take a very easterly dogleg to Eniwetok, so my hunch is that his ships went full speed towards the west. Steve may not have had the stomach for this fight. My carriers are heading west before moving north to Marcus.

My divisions at Wake are still loading and may take some time. Depending on troop count, I may have to remove some of the flak units form there also to stay under the stacking limit.

My troops hit Marcus and took it in one turn. Once supply is offloaded, I'll get the divisions out of there too. I've roundaboutly routed the plane carriers there to Eniwetok also. That island is easily within range of both Wake and Marcus, so I shouldn't have issues getting planes up front. Eni also has a level 3 port, so I should be able go get planes off. PB4Ys from Pearl made it to Wake. I'll be forwarding them to Marcus where they'll have a very deep view into Japanese waters. Two fighter squadrons and two SBD squadrons from Eniwetok are now at Wake for extra cover there.

I'll eventually want stuff like B-25s at Marcus to interdict any of his shipping that strays near.

quote:

Pre-Invasion action off Marcus Island (123,85)

15 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
BB Revenge~
BB Prince of Wales
BB Indiana
BB Washington
BB Mississippi
BB New Mexico
CA Quincy
CA San Francisco
CA Minneapolis
CA Astoria
DD Drayton
DD Cummings
DD Dunlap
AP Mount McKinley

Japanese ground losses:
986 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 54 disabled
Non Combat: 13 destroyed, 52 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 2 disabled
Guns lost 6 (2 destroyed, 4 disabled)

BB Revenge~ firing at 48th Naval Guard Unit
BB Prince of Wales firing at 61st JNAF AF Unit
BB Indiana firing at 61st JNAF AF Unit
BB Washington firing at 7th Port Unit
BB Mississippi firing at 7th Port Unit
BB New Mexico firing at 48th Naval Guard Unit
CA Quincy firing at 61st JNAF AF Unit
CA San Francisco firing at 61st JNAF AF Unit
CA Minneapolis firing at 48th Naval Guard Unit
CA Astoria firing at 48th Naval Guard Unit
DD Drayton firing at 48th Naval Guard Unit
DD Cummings firing at 48th Naval Guard Unit
DD Dunlap firing at 7th Port Unit
Defensive Guns fire at approaching troops in landing craft at 4,000 yards
Defensive Guns fire at approaching troops in landing craft at 1,000 yards


quote:

Amphibious Assault at Marcus Island (123,85)

TF 350 troops unloading over beach at Marcus Island, 123,85

Allied ground losses:
837 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 193 disabled
Non Combat: 3 destroyed, 78 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 63 (0 destroyed, 63 disabled)
Vehicles lost 61 (0 destroyed, 61 disabled)

10 Support troops accidentally lost during unload of 43rd Infantry Div /2
10 Support troops lost from landing craft during unload of 43rd Infantry Div /6
10 Support troops lost in surf during unload of 43rd Infantry Div /14


quote:

nvasion Support action off Marcus Island (123,85)

4 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
BB Revenge~
BB Prince of Wales
BB Indiana
BB Washington
BB Mississippi
BB New Mexico
CA Quincy
CA San Francisco
CA Minneapolis
CA Astoria
DD Dunlap
AP Mount McKinley
DD Drayton
AP Wharton

Japanese ground losses:
79 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 6 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

BB Revenge~ firing at 48th Naval Guard Unit
BB Prince of Wales firing at 7th Port Unit
BB Indiana firing at 61st JNAF AF Unit
BB Washington firing at 61st JNAF AF Unit
BB Mississippi firing at 7th Port Unit
BB New Mexico firing at 61st JNAF AF Unit
CA Quincy firing at 48th Naval Guard Unit
CA San Francisco firing at 48th Naval Guard Unit
CA Minneapolis firing at 7th Port Unit
CA Astoria firing at 7th Port Unit
DD Dunlap fired at enemy troops
Defensive Guns fire at approaching troops in landing craft at 2,000 yards


quote:

Ground combat at Marcus Island (123,85)

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 10191 troops, 202 guns, 125 vehicles, Assault Value = 279

Defending force 2865 troops, 24 guns, 3 vehicles, Assault Value = 40

Allied adjusted assault: 73

Japanese adjusted defense: 2

Allied assault odds: 36 to 1 (fort level 2)

Allied forces CAPTURE Marcus Island !!!

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Japanese aircraft losses
H6K5 Mavis-Taitei: 6 destroyed

Combat modifiers
Defender: forts(+), leaders(-), disruption(-), preparation(-)
fatigue(-), experience(-)
Attacker: shock(+), fatigue(-)

Japanese ground losses:
1676 casualties reported
Squads: 81 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 155 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 14 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 27 (27 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Vehicles lost 4 (4 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Units destroyed 2

Allied ground losses:
261 casualties reported
Squads: 16 destroyed, 16 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 3 (1 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Vehicles lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled)

Assaulting units:
43rd Infantry Division
4th USMC Raider Bn~

Defending units:
48th Naval Guard Unit
7th Port Unit
61st JNAF AF Unit


_____________________________


(in reply to ChuckBerger)
Post #: 266
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/26/2019 2:48:27 AM   
Bif1961


Posts: 2014
Joined: 6/26/2008
From: Phenix City, Alabama
Status: offline 		So it is not obvious that he has an admitted issue when he lands at Marcus Island while still trying to pull troops off his recent landing at Wake? That was a tactical risk, the blanket can only be pulled so far without exposing the head Marcus island or the feet Wake Island. That is not insider trading that is easy 101 map reading, both sides know that the Allies landed and just took Marcus and they both know he is trying to pull troops off of his recent conquest of Wake. If you would go back I commented about it before the landings at either occurred. I was in the Intelligence Community for 30 years I lived OPSEC everyday. If you can point to where I gave away prividleged information I would be interested in seeing it. I take my vow to not let information go from one side to the other, seriously. My comments in any AAR are based only on what that person has presented, nothing more.

< Message edited by Bif1961 -- 3/26/2019 2:59:49 AM >

(in reply to Mundy)
Post #: 267
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/26/2019 4:07:06 AM   
ChuckBerger

 

Posts: 278
Joined: 8/10/2006
Status: offline 		Your comment that "Might it be when your carriers move towards Wake and leave the Marcus invasion fleet exposed another element/s will attack it?" was in my view way over the line, and if I was on the other side I'd be annoyed by it.

If you're reading both sides, your questions and advice and thoughts can all be shaped by what you know of the other side's activities. Even subconsciously. For that reason I think giving advice and commenting on tactics is over the line if you're reading both sides. Should really only be done if you are reading one side, and therefore share the player's ignorance about the other side.

Just my own approach. I won't comment further, sorry for the AAR interruption. I thought both players should know the extent of your commenting on both threads. If they're OK with it, who am I to disagree.

(in reply to Bif1961)
Post #: 268
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/26/2019 9:02:25 AM   
Bif1961


Posts: 2014
Joined: 6/26/2008
From: Phenix City, Alabama
Status: offline 		I will address what you cite as an example. In this AAR he stated he sighted an element of the KB between his carriers, Allied, near Marcus Island, which he was about to land on and Wake Island which he was in the process of taking troops off of after taking it a few turns ago. So reading his comments, IN THIS AAR ALONE, I asked a simple question, not knowing where the KB was myself and what if all of it was between his carriers and Wake, thereby threatening Wake, he had to defend both Islands with the same carriers so what would he do if another element of the KB showed up closer to Marcus Island. That is not based on what was going on in the other AAR. That question based only on what he clearly stated was the tactical situation he just presented in this AAR. If you have two areas to defend and can't do both at the same time isn't it a valid question to ask if you decide to defend one don't you leave the other exposed? That is tactics 101. By landing quickly at Marcus shortly after the landing at Wake he exposed himself if the KB showed up and he was the one in THIS AAR who stated where and when the KB showed up and that forced him into a decision. I invite others to scroll up and read the exchange I mentioned nothing that was not a simple question that would come to anyone's mind in the same situation.

However, I will leave it to the forum members in the following way and will go by their decisions:

Option 1) It is ok to read both AARs in a two sided game as long as I do not comment about tactics, operations or strategy.

Option 2) It is ok to comment on tactics, operations or strategies if I am only limiting myself to reading and commenting in one AAR in a two sided contest.

Option 3) It is ok to read both AARs and make comments about tactics, operations and strategies as long I am diligent and careful not to cross contaminate the AARs.

I will ask them to vote with what they have done in the past and what they fell is appropriate. It will not be majority rules but if others feel as I do that all options are valid then I will continue to do all options as I have in the past decade on this forum. However if no one else feels that all the aforementioned options are valid then I will limit myself to options 1 and/or options 2.

(in reply to ChuckBerger)
Post #: 269
RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) - 3/26/2019 3:46:43 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline 		Bif, your situation may be different because of your experience and training in OPSEC, so I am not sure I can judge for you. For myself, I found out early on that it is all too easy to slip up and say something that seems innocuous but others noted a little hint of information. So I only read one AAR side most of the time and I do comment when I have something to say.

Most of the time the AAR writer has already thought of my suggestion and decided differently, but it is a way to get them to clue me in about other things I have not thought of.

So for me, options 1 and 2 apply but not option 3.

_____________________________

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 Bif1961)
Post #: 270
Page:   <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Getting Bottlenecked: SierraJuliet (J) vs Mundy (A) Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   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

1.203