RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: 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 87 88 [89] 90 91 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/12/2021 11:36:11 PM

Lowpe

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

May 13, 1942

Miss a large oiler near Horn Island...

6-1, finally take Bundaberg.

Ground combat at Bundaberg (96,155)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 33838 troops, 474 guns, 545 vehicles, Assault Value = 935

Defending force 13958 troops, 153 guns, 33 vehicles, Assault Value = 239

Allied adjusted assault: 614

Japanese adjusted defense: 95

Allied assault odds: 6 to 1 (fort level 0)

Allied forces CAPTURE Bundaberg !!!

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-57-I Topsy: 3 destroyed
A6M2 Zero: 1 destroyed

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

Japanese ground losses:
1044 casualties reported
Squads: 12 destroyed, 43 disabled
Non Combat: 24 destroyed, 58 disabled
Engineers: 35 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 76 (74 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Vehicles lost 27 (27 destroyed, 0 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
235 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 34 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 3 (1 destroyed, 2 disabled)

Assaulting units:
7th RAA Coastal Artillery Regiment
3rd Australian Division
2/4th Armoured Regiment
6th RAA Coastal Artillery Regiment
2/5th Armoured Regiment
5th Australian Division
2/8th Armoured Regiment
5th RAA Coastal Artillery Regiment
46th Indian Brigade
2nd Aus Cav Brigade
4th Australian/B Division
147th Field Artillery Battalion
2nd Marine Defense Battalion
223rd Field Artillery Battalion
2nd RAA Coastal Artillery Regiment
98th Coast AA Regiment
198th Field Artillery Battalion
148th Field Artillery Battalion
II Australian
4th RAAF Base Force
131st Field Artillery Battalion
260th Field Artillery Battalion
A/B Battery Heavy Coastal Artillery Regiment

Defending units:
Sasebo 8th SNLF
33rd Division
Yokosuka 4th SNLF
1st Raiding Rgt /2
1st Medium Field Artillery Regiment
5th Naval Construction Battalion
4th JAAF AF Bn
21st Infantry Rgt /7

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 7/12/2021 11:47:15 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2641

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/12/2021 11:47:02 PM

Lowpe

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

Having fleet carriers off Australia, pretty much for a month, with less than 100 fighters is just asking to be destroyed.

Anyway, I am not reacting to him...rather I have my own plans and they can burn fuel till the cows come home there. Suits me fine.

Only 60 fighters over Rockhampton...down to 20k troops and 12 units 133 guns and 20 AFVs.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2642

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/12/2021 11:50:02 PM

Lowpe

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

Why would you base your transports at Bundaberg? Just doesn't make sense.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2643

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/12/2021 11:54:54 PM

Lowpe

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

An Iboat and a tanker in port at Colombo...bombers and aux way down, fighters up.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2644

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/12/2021 11:59:17 PM

Lowpe

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

Luzon

Ground combat at Clark Field (79,76)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 34498 troops, 507 guns, 636 vehicles, Assault Value = 1026

Defending force 35939 troops, 339 guns, 217 vehicles, Assault Value = 1193

Japanese adjusted assault: 753

Allied adjusted defense: 1195

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 1)

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
4507 casualties reported
Squads: 22 destroyed, 332 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 51 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 21 disabled
Vehicles lost 17 (1 destroyed, 16 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
165 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 7 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 23 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 4 (2 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Vehicles lost 31 (12 destroyed, 19 disabled)

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2645

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/13/2021 12:00:41 AM

Lowpe

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

Really using the Allied fighters in a ground attack role....they do very well.

Morning Air attack on 21st Infantry Regiment, at 96,155 (Bundaberg)

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid spotted at 19 NM, estimated altitude 6,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 5 minutes

Allied aircraft
Beaufighter Ic x 2
P-39D Airacobra x 20

Allied aircraft losses
P-39D Airacobra: 3 damaged

Aircraft Attacking:
18 x P-39D Airacobra bombing from 100 feet
2 x P-39D Airacobra bombing from 100 feet
Ground Attack: 1 x 500 lb GP Bomb

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2646

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/13/2021 1:19:21 AM

BBfanboy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Just had my California brother out visiting for the last 10 days....doing super well after heart surgery. He walked 5 miles at an Arboretum for example!

Thanks for everyones' wellwishes.

Took him back to the airport this am.

Great to hear some good news! Thanks for sharing.

_____________________________

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 #: 2647

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/13/2021 1:24:19 AM

BBfanboy

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Why would you base your transports at Bundaberg? Just doesn't make sense.

Could they have been put there to fly out troops and got stranded by airfield damage or aircraft damage? Obviously it is safer to base them at another airfield and use the "Pick Up Troops" mission to get the troops out, but most of us do that so rarely that it might not have occurred to him.

_____________________________

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 #: 2648

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/13/2021 1:26:03 AM

DesertWolf101

Posts: 1445
Joined: 11/26/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Luzon

Ground combat at Clark Field (79,76)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 34498 troops, 507 guns, 636 vehicles, Assault Value = 1026

Defending force 35939 troops, 339 guns, 217 vehicles, Assault Value = 1193

Japanese adjusted assault: 753

Allied adjusted defense: 1195

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 1)

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
4507 casualties reported
Squads: 22 destroyed, 332 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 51 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 21 disabled
Vehicles lost 17 (1 destroyed, 16 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
165 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 7 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 23 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 4 (2 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Vehicles lost 31 (12 destroyed, 19 disabled)

How is your overall supply in Luzon? Looks like you still have enough even though it's May. I'm curious, was there much effort by NJP72 to bomb your supply and did you send any additional shipments to Luzon by submarine or transport?

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2649

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/13/2021 1:36:55 AM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Could they have been put there to fly out troops and got stranded by airfield damage or aircraft damage? Obviously it is safer to base them at another airfield and use the "Pick Up Troops" mission to get the troops out, but most of us do that so rarely that it might not have occurred to him.

As Japan you fly troops so much there really is no excuse, or perhaps they were simply damaged very early by a surprise bombardment and never got fixed, but their sr isn't that high and there was aviation support unit there now...so don't know.

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 7/13/2021 1:40:28 AM >

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 2650

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/13/2021 1:38:56 AM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101

How is your overall supply in Luzon? Looks like you still have enough even though it's May. I'm curious, was there much effort by NJP72 to bomb your supply and did you send any additional shipments to Luzon by submarine or transport?

I got one xak in from Pearl, out of three sent, one sunk by iboat, one chickened out, the other made it.

I have had a few sub loads sent there.

Balikpapen and Miri were late conquers and I got about six xakl loads of supply out of there for Luzon.

Got about 4-5k supply left. Japan is bombing everyday by air now.

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 7/13/2021 1:39:15 AM >

(in reply to DesertWolf101)

Post #: 2651

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/13/2021 1:47:05 AM

Lowpe

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

First CD gun unit arrives at Rockhampton today...starting a general bombardment there as Japan withdraws from the base. I suspect he might bombard me.

Dispatched mines for Bundaberg, HQa, and some Aviation support. Sent more CD guns from Bundaberg to Rockhampton.

PT boats to rebase to Bundaberg.

Will set up another cap trap over the armored cars tomorrow...they will move by rail this day, and the bombers should follow to the new base. Tricksy.

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2652

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/13/2021 2:03:02 AM

RangerJoe

Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Just had my California brother out visiting for the last 10 days....doing super well after heart surgery. He walked 5 miles at an Arboretum for example!

Thanks for everyones' wellwishes.

Took him back to the airport this am.

Great to hear some good news! Thanks for sharing.

Yes, that is good news!

_____________________________

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 #: 2653

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/13/2021 11:34:55 AM

Lowpe

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

May 14th, 1942

Not good...China looking very perilous now. One of our smaller corps was in reserve no pursuit and stayed there, but the AT guns were all wiped out. I was counting on a better performance from them.

Air lifting all Indian Jungle Guns now to Ankang to face this new Armored thrust.

Will probably have to move all C47s to provide supply along the Ankang road.

Ground combat at 83,45 (near Nanyang)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 28840 troops, 270 guns, 557 vehicles, Assault Value = 1003

Defending force 30632 troops, 187 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 694

Japanese adjusted assault: 813

Allied adjusted defense: 1231

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2

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

Japanese ground losses:
255 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 33 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Guns lost 37 (34 destroyed, 3 disabled)
Vehicles lost 43 (1 destroyed, 42 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
1228 casualties reported
Squads: 3 destroyed, 155 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 18 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 10 disabled
Units destroyed 1

Assaulting units:
12th Tank Regiment
5th Tank Regiment
9th Tank Regiment
23rd Tank Regiment
10th Tank Regiment
13th Tank Regiment
15th Tank Regiment
40th Division
3rd Tank Regiment
116th Division
11th Tank Regiment
13th Army
52nd Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion
51st Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion
11th Field Artillery Regiment

Defending units:
41st Chinese Corps
30th Chinese Corps
77th Chinese Corps
85th British AT Rgt /2

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 7/13/2021 11:36:09 AM >

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2654

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/13/2021 11:40:26 AM

Lowpe

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

Making progress...

Will have to sort thru my AA allocations as now they cannot reach some of the big resource bases in the south. Plus it will free up the Kittyhawk squadrons which have been protecting down south.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2655

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/13/2021 1:13:08 PM

Lowpe

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

I don't think I have flown supplies with the transports yet, they are moving troops. Right now we have a pretty high percent rest...normally run around 30% depending upon range and other conditions.

Try to rest them a day after a move...would like to rest them the day prior too, but that hasn't always been the case.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2656

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/13/2021 1:36:35 PM

Lowpe

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

May 15th, 1942

Our tricky CAP trap worked...the armored cars left by rail yesterday, I then put them into move mode so they are in the middle of nowhere, but close to Charleville, and LRCAP'd them with P40s and the IJ bombers followed, well some of them.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2657

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/13/2021 1:38:41 PM

Lowpe

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

Just a grinding fight with here...building up our next strongpoint south of Ankang, mtn guns and Stuarts there.

We are being bombed daily by Japan...

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2658

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/13/2021 1:39:17 PM

Lowpe

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

Look at that coordination...we swept Trin today, but nobody there.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2659

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/13/2021 1:44:24 PM

Lowpe

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

Rockhampton falls...going to have to do some serious clicks in Australia now, and reset our two command HQs prep.

The route to Darwin is getting built up too...Alice Springs is a 4 AF, Oodnadatta is 6. Time to get some recon on Tenant Creek.

Ground combat at Rockhampton (95,152)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 44828 troops, 745 guns, 541 vehicles, Assault Value = 1545

Defending force 8051 troops, 37 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 89

Allied adjusted assault: 1600

Japanese adjusted defense: 59

Allied assault odds: 27 to 1 (fort level 3)

Allied forces CAPTURE Rockhampton !!!

Combat modifiers
Defender: preparation(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
1842 casualties reported
Squads: 39 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 121 destroyed, 89 disabled
Engineers: 81 destroyed, 7 disabled
Guns lost 22 (17 destroyed, 5 disabled)
Units retreated 4

Allied ground losses:
620 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 69 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 6 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 7 disabled
Guns lost 19 (1 destroyed, 18 disabled)
Units pursuing 4

Attack at Bundaberg:

Ground combat at Bundaberg (96,155)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 30678 troops, 467 guns, 514 vehicles, Assault Value = 896

Defending force 11761 troops, 88 guns, 10 vehicles, Assault Value = 121

Allied adjusted assault: 99

Japanese adjusted defense: 123

Allied assault odds: 1 to 2

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), disruption(-), preparation(-), supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
766 casualties reported
Squads: 9 destroyed, 51 disabled
Non Combat: 16 destroyed, 20 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Guns lost 15 (7 destroyed, 8 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
131 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 21 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Vehicles lost 6 (2 destroyed, 4 disabled)

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2660

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/13/2021 1:54:34 PM

Lowpe

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

I have been experimenting with flying in supplies with bombers to a Chinese HQ unit in the mountains(no base), range 6 from Ledo...but look at the Blenheim losses today!

We will switch them to Tsuyung, which is 4 (82) but 8 hexes distant (one less than the Blen IV's normal range).

We will leave the heavy bombers transporting supplies to the mountains until Tsuyung gets to level 5. Not seeing losses there yet.

Airlifted 150 supplies into China today.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2661

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/13/2021 2:04:11 PM

Lowpe

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

Looking strong here...will be able to upgrade the rest of these Australians to better troopers soon....

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2662

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/13/2021 8:22:00 PM

anarchyintheuk

Posts: 3921
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline

If you still have time you can airlift a tactical hq there.

Meaning Nanyang.

< Message edited by anarchyintheuk -- 7/13/2021 8:23:13 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2663

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/14/2021 1:43:33 AM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

If you still have time you can airlift a tactical hq there.

Meaning Nanyang.

I have Ankang with HQ there, and Command HQ prepping for Ankang as well...Japan has Nanyang.

(in reply to anarchyintheuk)

Post #: 2664

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/14/2021 1:48:12 AM

Lowpe

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

Finished the turn...nothing too exciting I hope.

I reduced the naval air strike by one hex near Colombo to avoid CAP traps.

Will heavily bomb Bundaberg and attack again. I am now rotating the troops there so attacks will occur everyday with some units resting for the next day's attack.

General pursuit from Rockhampton, troops getting on trains to rail there to hold the base...dispatched an AM to make there way there. Runway works, but no supplies yet. Will think about setting up a cap trap for the KB to blunder into.

Worked on pilots, sending air groups hither and thither, etc. etc. Lots of behind the actions movements. Switched some prep, but it seems to me Japan is abandoning eastern Australia.

Which means a tactical choice Perth or Darwin?

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2665

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/14/2021 3:31:19 AM

BBfanboy

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

After the losses he has suffered, I suspect Darwin would be his best bet because it is still isolated. Perth is on a rail line so you can easily supply any effort in that direction.

_____________________________

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 #: 2666

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/14/2021 3:47:56 AM

RangerJoe

Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline

Lowpe vs the Japanese:

In Australia:

In China:

Around India:

The DEI:

The Philippines:

The Japanese:

All over:

_____________________________

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 #: 2667

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/14/2021 10:38:52 AM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

After the losses he has suffered, I suspect Darwin would be his best bet because it is still isolated. Perth is on a rail line so you can easily supply any effort in that direction.

Japan has Perth and Darwin...It is my choice for the next Australian adventure....

Is this guy actually within range to influence the battle?

4th Fleet is planning for an attack on Wake Island.

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 2668

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/14/2021 10:43:05 AM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

Lowpe vs the Japanese:

Not really true...China looks like it will fall. I might be able to get Valentines in there to hold the mountains eventually. Heck, Japan has Perth, Darwin, PM, PagoPago, Ceylon, Chittagong, Noumea. That is a pretty strong expansion.

(in reply to RangerJoe)

Post #: 2669

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/14/2021 11:11:28 AM

Lowpe

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

Looking ahead to June of 1942...

Allies start getting 36/month Hurricane IIc...which I really need since I have been trading them against the Japanese. Most squadrons are depleted.

Australian B339 recon, Canadian Hurricanes...

Bristol class destroyers are rolling in, they are kind of sweet...already got my first Liberty ship.

Long Island CVE in two weeks, Wasp in one month followed by North Carolina plus a CLAA or two...Not sure what to use the Long Island for...every game I play as Japan it seems she gets sunk pretty quickly. With Wasp, I have a CV force that can do a lot.

Lots of minesweepers and cargo ships and a big AV (Chandeleur), Subs...etc. Swimming in ships.

The fresh squadrons keep rolling in, an almost daily routine to staff with pilots give orders, and check to see when the unit withdraws. I have set up collection hubs and training bases for troops and planes. Those I can or will want to buy out go one place...those I don't want to buy out (restricted, withdrawing, etc) go to other bases.

It bothers me that in the middle of May I still only see A6M2 and Oscar Ic. The next generation of fighters for Japan will pose a problem: the A6M3-5, Oscar IIa, IIa Tojo, Nicks...with PDU off he won't be running around with tons of Tojo IIa or George or Jack...but the A6M line is still very strong if he speeds it up.

My one P38 squadron is half full, at Pearl. Has decently trained pilots in it...and really needs to get off islands as the SR is quite high.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2670

Page: << < prev 87 88 [89] 90 91 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))