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 111 112 [113] 114 115 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/16/2022 11:43:54 AM

Lowpe

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

Burma

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3361

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/16/2022 11:44:54 AM

Lowpe

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

Good results...

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3362

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/16/2022 4:41:21 PM

castor troy

Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

Lowpe: Big E makes Gardner Island...not much further to Canton or should I stay here and bring the ARs forward?

IIRC, subs can attack disbanded ships a port that is less than 4 in development. I would not park Big E in anything less, unless I could mine the beejeezes out of the port.

Not disbanded ships, but docked ships at port 3 or smaller. You can disband ships at dot bases and they are immune to anything.

Doesn't correspond with my experience. When I first started playing the game the AI sent BB Nagato and a couple of DDs to Davao, on Mindanao at the head of a deep bay. My search spotted it going there so I sent subs to stake out every hex in the bay and across the entrance. At first there was no indication it was still there so I thought it might have slipped out, but I had no better prospects for the subs and left them there. After about 10 days they got a shot at Nagato and one torp hit. This was right in the Davao hex which was still Allied and Naval Search had not spotted any TFs, so I figure it was disbanded.

Confident it would not slip out so easily now, I kept the subs probing with patrol zones entering and exiting the hex and always one sub on station at Davao. A week later a sub got another shot at Nagato and scored two hits with Mark 10 torps. Now Nagato was in real trouble and had to leave for repairs. On the way out of the bay a Dutch sub hit her once and then a US sub finished her. Interference from the two DDs with her was minimal.

So my conclusion is that the Nagato TF disbanded, awaiting the arrival of invasion forces and it took a lot of die rolls to find her in some place near the shore. Maybe the subs could be better used, but I was happy with their work there. And when I had to restart the game (it was my first and I made lots of rookie mistakes), Nagato did the same thing and I repeated the trap successfully, but the subs were not used identically so it was not a simple repeat of the previous game.

Have never experienced a disbanded ship being hit by a sub other than midgets in all the thousands rounds played and I even always felt disbanding combat ships in dot bases to be highly gamey because of that. Not only because of subs not hitting them but also because of aircraft not sighting them either.

_____________________________

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 3363

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/17/2022 1:12:06 AM

Lowpe

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

Sept 21, 1942

Paying attention to all the subs...my eyes and ears...

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3364

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/17/2022 1:13:18 AM

Lowpe

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

Bombard Tabby again, light bombardment of Marcus, and an Iboat hits an AMC in the Gilberts...

Going in at Marcus tomorrow...stiff opposition!

Tabby will be tomorrow....

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3365

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/17/2022 1:15:17 PM

Encircled

Posts: 2024
Joined: 12/30/2010
From: Northern England
Status: offline

That is quite a big garrison for Marcus

I suspect that is has been recently reinforced so it might not be as bad as it looks

_____________________________

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3366

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/17/2022 7:02:51 PM

Lowpe

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

Going in at Marcus...very strong defense, plus lots of midgets...probably shouldn't have done it!

Tabby will be tomorrow if nothing bad shows up...

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3367

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/17/2022 8:20:11 PM

Lowpe

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

Sept 22, 1942

Marcus Island Invasion

The first midget, strikes true!

ASW attack near Marcus Island at 123,85

Japanese Ships
SSX Ha-3

Allied Ships
BB Tennessee, Torpedo hits 1
DD Farenholt

SSX Ha-3 launches 2 torpedoes at BB Tennessee
DD Farenholt fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Farenholt fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Farenholt fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Farenholt fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Farenholt fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3368

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/17/2022 8:21:01 PM

Lowpe

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

But the Tennessee shrugs it off and participates in the opening bombardment:

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3369

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/17/2022 8:23:03 PM

Lowpe

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

The invasion fleet is in position, the 3rd Marines and support troops are heading ashore in any kind of craft than can carry them!

Madness, pure madness!

But those battleships, from Battleship row at Pearl, deliver the goods, and how!

The Japanese defense, although numerous, looks lightly supported. No artillery or coastal defense guns spotted...no armored cars or afvs...

USN likes the initial reports...but they wonder: Where is the KB?

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 2/17/2022 8:25:02 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3370

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/17/2022 8:25:44 PM

gervabit

Posts: 49
Joined: 7/2/2019
Status: offline

This degree of loss is due to a low level of fortifications, overstacking or luck.

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3371

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/17/2022 8:26:02 PM

Lowpe

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

Marines are ashore! Now every eye turns to the sky...

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3372

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/17/2022 8:29:22 PM

Lowpe

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

First phase of landing looks good...

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3373

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/17/2022 8:30:48 PM

Lowpe

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

In the sky, a few Wildcats cover a very light raid by a lone fleet carrier...

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3374

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/17/2022 8:38:11 PM

Lowpe

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

Forward, Marines, forward!

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 2/17/2022 8:39:22 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3375

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/17/2022 8:41:37 PM

Lowpe

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

Ground combat at Marcus Island (123,85)

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 9594 troops, 202 guns, 194 vehicles, Assault Value = 483

Defending force 5550 troops, 80 guns, 18 vehicles, Assault Value = 111

Allied adjusted assault: 94

Japanese adjusted defense: 13

Allied assault odds: 7 to 1 (fort level 3)

Allied forces CAPTURE Marcus Island !!!

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Japanese aircraft losses
G3M2 Nell: 1 destroyed

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

Japanese ground losses:
6741 casualties reported
Squads: 123 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 218 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 35 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 104 (104 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Vehicles lost 29 (29 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Units destroyed 6

Allied ground losses:
435 casualties reported
Squads: 31 destroyed, 21 disabled
Non Combat: 21 destroyed, 12 disabled
Engineers: 4 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 12 (8 destroyed, 4 disabled)
Vehicles lost 78 (60 destroyed, 18 disabled)
Units destroyed 1

Assaulting units:
763rd Tank Battalion
3rd Marine Division
637th TD Bn /1
7th US Naval Const Bn /1

Defending units:
Maizuru 2nd SNLF
Sasebo 6th SNLF
6th Indpt SNLF Coy
64th Naval Guard Unit
9th RF Gun Battalion
55th JNAF AF Unit
80th JAAF AF Bn

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3376

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/17/2022 8:44:59 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: gervabit

This degree of loss is due to a low level of fortifications, overstacking or luck.

Plus bonuses from amphibious invasion, great recon, lots of firepower, and perhaps leadership.

(in reply to gervabit)

Post #: 3377

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/17/2022 10:47:49 PM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

Nice job...are you playing with stacking limits? If so, the real trick is going to be to get the Marines off before KB shows up. It's not the end of the world if you have to leave them, but that will eventually create another problem. I don't see a base force in the invasion fleet.....I would want Catalinas up to provide some air search, so hope you brought an AVD or something like that

_____________________________

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3378

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/17/2022 11:12:43 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Nice job...are you playing with stacking limits? If so, the real trick is going to be to get the Marines off before KB shows up. It's not the end of the world if you have to leave them, but that will eventually create another problem. I don't see a base force in the invasion fleet.....I would want Catalinas up to provide some air search, so hope you brought an AVD or something like that

The midget missed her...I believe there is a 2nd on a followup task force too.

ASW attack near Marcus Island at 123,85

Japanese Ships
SSX Ha-7, hits 1

Allied Ships
AVD Ballard
BB Mississippi
BB California
AM Vireo
AP Crescent City
AP Thomas Jefferson
AK Procyon
xAP Dilga
xAP Bontekoe
xAP Nurmahal
xAP Merkur
xAK Hoegh Merchant
DD Whipple
DD Craven
DD Caldwell

SSX Ha-7 launches 2 torpedoes at AVD Ballard
Ha-7 bottoming out ....

It is an atoll so there are always stacking limits, but yes it is a stacking limit game...

I have ACM, mines, CD guns, AA following up...so the trick will be to escape & evacuate and garrison. As you quite rightly pointed out.

I figure 60 days until Japan counter invades...

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 2/17/2022 11:14:50 PM >

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 3379

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/18/2022 11:55:17 AM

Lowpe

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

Aftermath

What a great TOE those Marines have. I knew they were good, but great leadership and very high experience...

Will sweep the mines, unload some construction engineers, evacuate some Marines, and unload supply. Mines on the way, plus a transport ship that can hopefully create PT boats although with the damage to the port that might not be possible, or possible only in small numbers and once the port is repaired redundant.

Japan has 12 midget subs here...hard to think they can make it back to the Marianas. Sank two this day.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3380

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/18/2022 11:59:48 AM

Lowpe

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

Tennessee suffers from low night experience and a mediocre Captain...somehow I didn't change him out. Most slow battleships have night experience mid 50s. Heck, they sat in a task force at Alameda in shakedown cruises the whole game to this point.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3381

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/18/2022 12:10:05 PM

Lowpe

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

Neosho had only 4499 fuel left when she was torpedoed....

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3382

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/18/2022 12:15:29 PM

Lowpe

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

Very useful...I really like the replenishment task force. Need to test out their ability to restock carriers from land bases too. I wonder if that is automatic too, or I need to manually add the planes?

VF-6 at CV Lexington takes VR replacements

This happens at the end of the day.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 2/18/2022 12:17:33 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3383

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/18/2022 12:44:55 PM

Lowpe

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

Tabby invasion tomorrow...we are outnumbered. 2 Marine Regiments (one understrength due to an Iboat attack) and 1 Army Regiment plus a Marine Tank Battalion....relying upon the heavy naval bombardments to carry the day.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3384

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/18/2022 12:56:56 PM

Mike Solli

Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

This is very interesting, Lowpe. By the way, those maps are beautiful!

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3385

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/18/2022 3:01:10 PM

BBfanboy

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

VRF and VRB/VRT? squadrons will replenish from land bases if the carriers are within their transfer range. No supply is required because the aircraft already exist.

_____________________________

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 #: 3386

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/18/2022 3:11:56 PM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

Very interesting move in Sept of 1942....I am not 100% sure what the naval losses are to-date, but if I am Japan I would be working on taking it back. He is probably already prepping a Division and some tanks for that purpose.

Are you going to try to hold it, or just leave a garrison that will be written off? It will occupy Imperial attention for a couple months and cause diversion of effort, so if that's your end-objective, mission accomplished I would say!

If your objective is to hold it, that could be really risky. You already know this, but it's a LOOONG way from any Allied base, so keeping a fleet nearby is going to be nearly impossible, and will be very exposed.

Right away as the Empire I would be showing up with the fleet, trying to sink any transports picking-up or dropping off, and blast the atoll with BBs. If you plan to support Catalinas with JUST an AVD, then I don't think that AVD is going to last long, you need a base unit.

Empire should also set-up a line of pickets to the east, floatplane subs or maybe some AKLs or something.

Anyway, he can't let you keep it, so I think you're going to lose it. As long as you're OK with that, I think mission will be accomplished.

_____________________________

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 3387

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/18/2022 3:20:33 PM

BBfanboy

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

Once Marcus gets repaired and some supply landed, Japan will have to divert shipping around it, slowing its support to SOPAC and NG areas.

_____________________________

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 Q-Ball)

Post #: 3388

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/18/2022 3:40:39 PM

Encircled

Posts: 2024
Joined: 12/30/2010
From: Northern England
Status: offline

Anything in '42 that forces Japan to react is good

_____________________________

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 3389

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/18/2022 3:52:26 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Are you going to try to hold it, or just leave a garrison that will be written off?

I am very flexible going forward.

I am definitely going to try and hold it.

There is a unit of 24 or more 155mm CD guns headed there, past Midway...if they can make it, it will become painful to suppress. More support units are headed there:

Many months ago, I came up with a stock Atoll defense for Allies:

Marine CD unit
Regiment
Art
AA
Armor
USN Port Unit
USNConstruction
Mines

Of those, I have fully prepped but not at Marcus: CD unit, Artillery (big guys 155s), Port Unit, AA.

Already there is a regiment (fraction of the 3rd Marines for now), Armor, and unloading a construction unit.

I will change this a bit, and say that the Port Unit isn't the best choice since naval support doesn't help in this case. So more construction engineers, and a fragment of a HQa (or a Marine Air Wing which is small) to provide air support.

I don't want the base to fall easily, I want to rotate more and more subs in...especially making the transit to and from the Marinas and Jimas difficult, plus friction on any bombarding forces away from land based ASW search.1

It is 19 hexes to Midway...so I can run in a fair bit of supply with subs and move some air mobile troops.

If I hold it or not, it should be more than worth it....for a lot of the reasons you point out.

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 2/18/2022 4:03:33 PM >

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 3390

Page: << < prev 111 112 [113] 114 115 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))