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: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (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: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) Page: <<   < prev  26 27 [28] 29 30   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/26/2020 5:26:08 PM   
GetAssista

 

Posts: 2732
Joined: 9/19/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy
quote:

ORIGINAL: GetAssista
So, how is it all going? This is quite a big lull already, there are murmurs in the peanut gallery

Shhhh! Our US members are having secret Thanksgiving AE planning conferences - necessary work of course! The turkey and beverages are incidental ...


Ah, that one, I see now! I did not realize it is that bad though

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 811
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/30/2020 12:39:47 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Jan 10, 1942

US and Dutch forces combine in a nice bombardment of Geraldton...






Attachment (1)

(in reply to GetAssista)
Post #: 812
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/30/2020 12:41:43 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		More bombing here...






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 813
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/30/2020 12:49:12 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Cleaning up the paratroopers...

An great result at Bundaberg...will SR troops in today and we should be able to hold, until the non stop ship bombardments start. Isolating an IJA division here would be great, if only temporary.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 814
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/30/2020 12:59:32 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline 		If you can bomb the Japanese Bundaberg, that would be nice.

Mining the waters in the area as well might help wreck any relief troops and supplies as well.

But nice work on those paratroopers, hopefully you can get more Japanese to die for their emperor soon.

_____________________________

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 Lowpe)
Post #: 815
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/30/2020 1:29:48 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Where are the troops in Sian going? Are some heading into the mountains off road?

I cannot find the dozen tank regiments...I think they are off flanking up the road towards Kungchang...but I thought they would get spotted today. I assigned my pitiful bombers to recon, and they didn't spot anything.

Indian Mountain Guns started arriving at Kungchang today...which is good, while 2 pounder AT will be flown to Chengtu later today, and then onto Kungchang. Building Tienshui up to a level 1 runway to facilitate air transport.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 816
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/30/2020 7:15:23 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Jan 11, 1942

Keeping up the bombardments!






Attachment (1)

(in reply to GetAssista)
Post #: 817
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/30/2020 7:18:18 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Banshees hit the IJA tanks...






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 818
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/30/2020 7:26:35 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Way too timid here, the Yanks should have arrived two days ago along with an Aussie Division...

More bombing at Cloncurry…


Ground combat at Bundaberg (96,155)

Japanese Shock attack

Attacking force 10407 troops, 50 guns, 12 vehicles, Assault Value = 338

Defending force 7802 troops, 183 guns, 82 vehicles, Assault Value = 168

Japanese adjusted assault: 478

Allied adjusted defense: 117

Japanese assault odds: 4 to 1 (fort level 0)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Bundaberg !!!

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), preparation(-), experience(-)
Attacker: shock(+)

Japanese ground losses:
290 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 32 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Allied ground losses:
2711 casualties reported
Squads: 40 destroyed, 30 disabled
Non Combat: 183 destroyed, 12 disabled
Engineers: 28 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 68 (62 destroyed, 6 disabled)
Vehicles lost 90 (87 destroyed, 3 disabled)
Units retreated 6
Units destroyed 1

Defeated Allied Units Retreating!

Assaulting units:
4th Division

Defending units:
17th MG Battalion
34th Infantry Regiment
5th RAA Coastal Artillery Regiment
Bundaberg RAN Base Force
2/16th Field Regiment
1st Medium Regiment
2nd RAA Coastal Artillery Regiment

Good news, another fighter squadron shows up in Oz, bringing the total now present to 7, but only two are full strength.

20th PS (P) arrives at Brisbane


< Message edited by Lowpe -- 11/30/2020 7:28:20 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 819
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/30/2020 7:49:29 PM   
BBfanboy


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

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Banshees hit the IJA tanks...






I have also found that the bigger bomb carried by DBs helps against tanks. Have you been flying at dive bombing altitude or lower? I was losing too many planes with dive bombing so I switched to level bombing from just above IJ light AA levels. Still effective bombing.

_____________________________

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 Lowpe)
Post #: 820
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/30/2020 10:24:43 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		I let them dive bomb since I know there is no AA present larger than a machine gun....

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 821
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 12/3/2020 1:22:48 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		The situation on the ground looks very good for the Allies currently around Perth. I believe Japan will have a very difficult time replacing losses.

Any suggestions for pulling off a nonbase bombardment? I have all float planes doing recon there, wirraways doing recon, set the task force to bombard, 0 range, escorts bombard, remain on station, direct, absolute. Any other ideas? Will appoint an aggressive task force commander...would inspiration help to?






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 12/3/2020 1:28:32 PM >

(in reply to GetAssista)
Post #: 822
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 12/3/2020 1:48:22 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		My own experience is rather lame. I assume lots of Recon will help.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 823
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 12/3/2020 1:52:12 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Bundaberg...situation not great, but hope to score some victories in the next day or two.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 824
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 12/3/2020 1:57:25 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		Its been years since I did this, but if my memory is reliable , you come in as SC TF with "remain on station." The next day, switch over to "bombard TF" and allow return to base with that hex as target. I did this to west of Calcutta as Japan. Place a LRCAP over TF/hex.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 825
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 12/3/2020 2:09:26 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Some of the ground reinforcements heading for western Australia...






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 826
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 12/3/2020 2:22:09 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		The British and American warships will break down into multiple small task forces race into a patrol plot ending in Chittagong where we will have fighters protecting the base. Our ships are not spotted. I suspect this will be bloody.

What a bloody game!










Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 12/3/2020 2:24:58 PM >

(in reply to GetAssista)
Post #: 827
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 12/3/2020 2:23:32 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

Its been years since I did this, but if my memory is reliable , you come in as SC TF with "remain on station." The next day, switch over to "bombard TF" and allow return to base with that hex as target. I did this to west of Calcutta as Japan. Place a LRCAP over TF/hex.


Ooooh, that is not good as the tanks will move away by then. But that kind of jives with my sketchy memory of having pulled it off before...


< Message edited by Lowpe -- 12/3/2020 2:24:16 PM >

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 828
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 12/3/2020 3:00:28 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline 		If there is no CAP, have fighters strafe, they will also bomb. Even if they don't destroy the tank, they can cause a lot of disruption, fatigue, and disablements.

_____________________________

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 Lowpe)
Post #: 829
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 12/3/2020 3:52:57 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Turns away...I pulled the fighters back to rest and lighten the AV support demand at Perth (if they had bombs, I would have used them). Another dive bomber squadron is enroute…

I suspect a fair bit of fireworks...

This is the first time the Allies will be using multiple small task force, none smaller than 3, off Chittagong.

Japan ship losses so far:

CVL, CS, CAx3, CLx4, DDx10. That is a hefty early expansion price.






(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 830
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 12/3/2020 4:27:42 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline 		For non-base bombardments the key thing seems to be a very good DL on the target. Recon night and day for a couple of turns before the bombardment, and of course have your FPs up for the bombardment itself.

I was using "remain on station" because there was no significant air threat, but usually the ships would bombard at night first.

Having two or more bombardment TFs also seemed to help - one large TF tends to have several ships that hardly fire at all while smaller ones empty their mags. And I am not sure of this, but I think the first bombardment TF raises the target DL a bit so the next one is more effective.

Edit: Forgot to mention: You can use your DDs to bombard too if you allow them to bombard and to approach closer than the 15K yards the AI likes to stay at. Someone recently posted that having the standoff range set to 0 keeps the AI from approaching closely to shore but setting it at 1 gets the DDs at least to approach as close as that (1000 yards) to shore. That seemed to be true when I tried it.

< Message edited by BBfanboy -- 12/3/2020 4:36:41 PM >

_____________________________

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 Lowpe)
Post #: 831
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 12/3/2020 4:38:22 PM   
BBfanboy


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

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Turns away...I pulled the fighters back to rest and lighten the AV support demand at Perth (if they had bombs, I would have used them). Another dive bomber squadron is enroute…

I suspect a fair bit of fireworks...

This is the first time the Allies will be using multiple small task force, none smaller than 3, off Chittagong.

Japan ship losses so far:

CVL, CS, CAx3, CLx4, DDx10. That is a hefty early expansion price.


Unsustainable! Greta will get after them for that!

_____________________________

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 Lowpe)
Post #: 832
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 12/3/2020 8:51:52 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Jan 13th, 1942

Japan going for Chittagong!






Attachment (1)

(in reply to GetAssista)
Post #: 833
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 12/3/2020 8:56:12 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		It is an absolute knife fight, and disaster strikes!

This task force was supposed to be the last in!




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 834
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 12/3/2020 8:59:29 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		In Chittagong harbor, long lances strike hard again!

Combats are starting out very close in...




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 835
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 12/3/2020 9:02:58 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Another fight at Chittagong, and no Allied ships sunk!






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 836
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 12/3/2020 9:09:40 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		No other naval combats take place...where are our light cruisers?

The bombardment is pulled off...




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 837
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 12/3/2020 9:11:49 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Found the IJA Tank Spearhead! I guess they turned back to clear the roadblock south of Sian?






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 838
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 12/3/2020 9:13:42 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		For now we will hold here...




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 839
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 12/3/2020 9:22:14 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		What an absolutely disappointing fight...our Light Cruisers are now 4 hexes from the IJN invasion fleet...our Heavy Cruiser intercepted the IJN after they bombarded, but got thoroughly destroyed....






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 840
Page:   <<   < prev  26 27 [28] 29 30   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) Page: <<   < prev  26 27 [28] 29 30   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

0.936