274 Auxillary aircraft?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

274 Auxillary aircraft?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> After Action Reports >> 274 Auxillary aircraft?

Page: << < prev 13 14 15 [16] 17 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

274 Auxillary aircraft? - 6/18/2005 8:05:20 AM

ADavidB

Posts: 2464
Joined: 9/17/2001
From: Toronto, Canada
Status: offline

BTW - one of the by-products of my nuisance reconning of Kwajalein is that it is showing me that there are the following aircraft there:

169 Fighters (Okay, that figures - PzB is getting greedy and wants to shoot down all bombers that I send over.

)

37 Bombers (That sounds right - he has a lot of Bettys in and around Rabaul.)

274 Auxillary - Huh!!!

What the devil for? Those can't all be recon planes. And if they are transports, why so many? Do the Japanese have a Paratroop Division?

Dave Baranyi

(in reply to ADavidB)

Post #: 451

RE: 274 Auxillary aircraft? - 6/18/2005 8:11:19 AM

Alikchi2

Posts: 1785
Joined: 5/14/2004
Status: offline

That's extremely odd - if that's mostly transports, that's nearly all of his!

Do you have any intel on where his para units are? I wouldn't put it beyond PzB to try a large scale para landing in the Pacific..

_____________________________

(in reply to ADavidB)

Post #: 452

RE: 274 Auxillary aircraft? - 6/18/2005 8:13:33 AM

CapAndGown

Posts: 3206
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline

As far as I can tell, auxilary means mostly the fighters that are not flying, plus, search planes and transports. I keep getting reports of about 1/2 fighters, 1/2 auxilary at bases where I know my opponent only has fighters based. Perhaps that means a CAP level of 50%? Or perhaps it some silly FOW thing. More Magoo type recon.

(in reply to ADavidB)

Post #: 453

RE: 274 Auxillary aircraft? - 6/18/2005 8:26:58 AM

ADavidB

Posts: 2464
Joined: 9/17/2001
From: Toronto, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alikchi

That's extremely odd - if that's mostly transports, that's nearly all of his!

Do you have any intel on where his para units are? I wouldn't put it beyond PzB to try a large scale para landing in the Pacific..

No, I have no idea where his paras are right now, and that's what worries me a bit. However, I have lots of CAP over all my bases and the CAP ought to shoot down and/or discourage and paradrops.

Thanks -

Dave Baranyi

(in reply to Alikchi2)

Post #: 454

RE: 274 Auxillary aircraft? - 6/18/2005 8:29:48 AM

ADavidB

Posts: 2464
Joined: 9/17/2001
From: Toronto, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown

As far as I can tell, auxilary means mostly the fighters that are not flying, plus, search planes and transports. I keep getting reports of about 1/2 fighters, 1/2 auxilary at bases where I know my opponent only has fighters based. Perhaps that means a CAP level of 50%? Or perhaps it some silly FOW thing. More Magoo type recon.

So you are saying that fighters under repair would be classified as auxillaries? That seems strange. That would imply that he has even more fighters there! On the other hand, a couple hundred transports would be "no fun" for me either.

Thanks -

Dave

(in reply to CapAndGown)

Post #: 455

RE: 274 Auxillary aircraft? - 6/18/2005 8:34:49 AM

ADavidB

Posts: 2464
Joined: 9/17/2001
From: Toronto, Canada
Status: offline

Ah, wait a minute - I know what is probably going on now. PzB is flying supplies into those bases that I've got covered by my anti-ship aircraft. That's why those bases can continue to shoot at my bombers - they still have supplies.

Some of my fighters ought to be able to reach over to Majuro and test out this theory.

Dave Baranyi

(in reply to ADavidB)

Post #: 456

RE: 274 Auxillary aircraft? - 6/18/2005 7:27:49 PM

ADavidB

Posts: 2464
Joined: 9/17/2001
From: Toronto, Canada
Status: offline

December 28, 1942 was a "tit-for-tat" sort of day. First off, I found and hit that sub that was sitting SE of Gili-Gili:

Sub attack at 56,96

Japanese Ships
SS I-20, hits 4, on fire, heavy damage

Allied Ships
DD Drayton
DD Grayson
DD Cushing
DD Sims

I didn't get a sinking confirmation, but I think that I-20 will be gone soon. Just in case, I'm sending a couple of DMS ships out of Gili-Gili on ASW. But there is an added reason for this - last turn I had those same DMSs in another ASW TF and while they didn't find the sub they did finally sweep on their way back in some of the mines out of Gili-Gili that the sub had left a few days before. For whatever reason, when I had sent those two DMSs from PM to GG to sweep mines they didn't sweep anything. (There are days when I wonder if there is anything in this game that doesn't require a work-around.

)

Balancing this activity was a Japanese ASW TF out of Kwajalein that hit and sank one of my subs:

ASW attack at 78,79

Japanese Ships
MSW W.21
APD APD-46
APD APD-39
APD APD-36
APD APD-34
APD APD-2

Allied Ships
SS S-33, hits 2, on fire, heavy damage

I wonder how obvious the change will be for Allied torpedos after January 1, 1943? (Or is this another one of those things that I have misunderstood?)

The rest of the action was all aerial bombing of bases - PzB didn't send out his Bettys against my ships. I've started to use my heavy bombers for close-in attacks on PzB's troops:

Day Air attack on 106th IJN Base Force, at 55,90

Allied aircraft
F4F-4 Wildcat x 16
B-17E Fortress x 32
B-24D Liberator x 33

No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
229 casualties reported

This is in addition to my regular "alternate" bombings (where I have Air or Port set as the secondary mission to Naval attacks):

Day Air attack on Buna , at 55,90

Allied aircraft
SBD Dauntless x 17
Kittyhawk I x 8
B-26B Marauder x 52

No Allied losses

Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 10

I'm doing similar things at Lae, Shortlands and Lautem.

Buna appears to only have 1 Japanese base force in it, so I've decided that I will attack it. At first I started to march some troops out of PM and over the mountains, but I stopped after a few days when the troops were making very little progress and hadn't left the PM hex, but their fatigue had already jumped from a fatigue of 15 to 60! It was obvious that there was no point in continuing because if the troops ever reached Buna they would be at a fatigue of 90 and be useless anyway. So I shipped those troops out of PM back to non-malarial Australia and I am preparing a new LCU for a naval invasion of Buna. I would rather take my chances with Bettys and Zeros than waste my time and effort with the land movement model.

BTW - PzB is moving more and more ships into Kwalalein, so he is really serious about stopping me in the Marshalls. Okay, I'll shift my emphasis to PNG, and maybe even back to Timor...

Dave Baranyi

(in reply to ADavidB)

Post #: 457

Air Only Day... - 6/19/2005 5:44:40 PM

ADavidB

Posts: 2464
Joined: 9/17/2001
From: Toronto, Canada
Status: offline

December 29, 1942 was an "Air Only" day - the only significant action was in the air, and even that was bombing undefended bases. Both PzB and I are resting and training our pilots by attacking near-by bases. I'm hitting Jaluit, Shortlands, Buna, Lae and the Timor bases. PzB is hitting verious spots in China and Mandalay.

This is a case of "Quiet is Good" for me - I need time to bring more forces to the front and there is no point wasting planes and pilots against PzB's "Gods of the Air" at this point.

As a side note - that 20 knot BB that I mentioned quite a while ago with the damaged radar is still sitting in a level 9 port with a shipyard and even with an AR in port and no other damaged ships in port with it - but it still refuses to go below sysdam 11 and the radar is still a "red zero". Unfortunately, I don't have a naval HQ nearby to give the extra "umph" that I suspect that it needs...

Dave Baranyi

(in reply to ADavidB)

Post #: 458

RE: Air Only Day... - 6/19/2005 6:20:36 PM

BLurking

Posts: 199
Joined: 3/24/2005
From: Frisco, TX
Status: offline

Check your stocks - I think if you don't have any replacement radar units the ship is going to sit and wait until one becomes available. I've seen this mostly as a problem around June and Oct. '42 when tons of ships are getting a radar upgrade.

(in reply to ADavidB)

Post #: 459

RE: Air Only Day... - 6/20/2005 1:21:01 AM

Captain Cruft

Posts: 3652
Joined: 3/17/2004
From: England
Status: offline

There was an OOB bug in early versions with respect to repairing the radar on US BBs. Certainly in vs. 1.0 at least.

--
I have been wondering about your comment that the land-based SBDs "didn't fly" (to paraphrase). To my mind these are the most important weapon you have, especially in the NG, Solomons and Marshalls areas. Could you briefly describe how many groups you have and where they are please? Also, is it possible that they have fallen victim to the "Get New Pilot" Naval Attack bug?

(in reply to BLurking)

Post #: 460

RE: Air Only Day... - 6/20/2005 4:21:16 AM

ADavidB

Posts: 2464
Joined: 9/17/2001
From: Toronto, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BLurking

Check your stocks - I think if you don't have any replacement radar units the ship is going to sit and wait until one becomes available. I've seen this mostly as a problem around June and Oct. '42 when tons of ships are getting a radar upgrade.

According to the inventory list, there are something like 60 SC radars in stock. My guess is that the BB has to repair down to some "magic number" - maybe "3" as with upgrades.

The BB finally went down to sys dam "10" this turn, so maybe by mid-to-late January I'll find out my answer. (And no - I have no intention of putting any of my ships into battle against PzB's torpedo-killer flotillas unless all of my ships are radar-equiped.)

Thanks -

Dave Baranyi

(in reply to BLurking)

Post #: 461

RE: Air Only Day... - 6/20/2005 4:29:46 AM

ADavidB

Posts: 2464
Joined: 9/17/2001
From: Toronto, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

There was an OOB bug in early versions with respect to repairing the radar on US BBs. Certainly in vs. 1.0 at least.

--
I have been wondering about your comment that the land-based SBDs "didn't fly" (to paraphrase). To my mind these are the most important weapon you have, especially in the NG, Solomons and Marshalls areas. Could you briefly describe how many groups you have and where they are please? Also, is it possible that they have fallen victim to the "Get New Pilot" Naval Attack bug?

I remember that bug. AFAIK it was fixed a couple of revs back. (We are both running at rev 1.50.)

I've got around 12 groups of land-based SBDs - about half in the Gilbert/Marshalls and the other half in the PNG-to-Lunga strip. I regularly fly them on naval attack with port or airbase attacks as secondary attacks. They fly quite regularly on the secondary roles. But they have never flown against a naval target. Now, to be fair, PzB rarely presents naval targets for me to go after with my planes, but when he has, my SBDs haven't flown for the usual reasons (clouds at their bases, clouds over the enemy TFs, etc.) I leave the SBD squadrens at 10% patrol just-in-case that improves their changes at finding targets.

BTW - I have almost as many patrol planes in those regions as I do dive bombers. Oh yes, and where ever I have SBDs I have plenty of escorts with equivalent ranges.

BTW II - I checked all of my air groups a while back and other than a couple of big bomber groups, all of them were fully equiped with pilots. But now that you've reminded me I'll check them again next turn.

Thanks -

Dave Baranyi

(in reply to Captain Cruft)

Post #: 462

RE: Air Only Day... - 6/20/2005 4:39:46 AM

ADavidB

Posts: 2464
Joined: 9/17/2001
From: Toronto, Canada
Status: offline

PzB mentioned in his latest email that he was starting to get concerned that "...the game will evolve into a large air campaign." Well, as of December 31, 1942 it sure is looking that way. We both continue to pound undefended targets while waiting for the "other guy" to make a bad move. (I've made my share - now it's PzB's turn...

)

To give you some ideas, here is PzB pounding Mandalay followed by me pounding Koepang:

Day Air attack on Mandalay , at 33,30

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 23
Ki-21 Sally x 132
Ki-48 Lily x 35

No Japanese losses

Allied ground losses:
43 casualties reported

Airbase hits 4
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 59

PzB has been doing this daily for the past couple of game weeks, so it's not surprising that the casualty numbers are slowly going down - there aren't that many troops left to be bombed. Now for my best "kill rate" of the day:

Day Air attack on 4th Mixed Brigade, at 28,77

Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 63

No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
204 casualties reported
Guns lost 2

This was a "pure" ground attack - I had other groups from other bases going after the airfields and so on as secondary missions. Most of my other attacks score fewer casualties. I haven't been getting any air base results to match what PzB has been getting with that monstrous horde of Sallys.

In non-air news, PzB hit another of my subs just north of Rabaul. I also spotted a sub of his just off of Gili-Gili so I'm sending some ASW TFs into the air to try to catch it before it causes more of a nuisance.

Dave Baranyi

(in reply to ADavidB)

Post #: 463

RE: Air Only Day... - 6/20/2005 4:42:41 AM

Captain Cruft

Posts: 3652
Joined: 3/17/2004
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ADavidB

quote:

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

There was an OOB bug in early versions with respect to repairing the radar on US BBs. Certainly in vs. 1.0 at least.

--
I have been wondering about your comment that the land-based SBDs "didn't fly" (to paraphrase). To my mind these are the most important weapon you have, especially in the NG, Solomons and Marshalls areas. Could you briefly describe how many groups you have and where they are please? Also, is it possible that they have fallen victim to the "Get New Pilot" Naval Attack bug?

I remember that bug. AFAIK it was fixed a couple of revs back. (We are both running at rev 1.50.)

Since it is an OOB bug I think it's the version you started with that matters.

quote:

I've got around 12 groups of land-based SBDs - about half in the Gilbert/Marshalls and the other half in the PNG-to-Lunga strip. I regularly fly them on naval attack with port or airbase attacks as secondary attacks. They fly quite regularly on the secondary roles. But they have never flown against a naval target. Now, to be fair, PzB rarely presents naval targets for me to go after with my planes, but when he has, my SBDs haven't flown for the usual reasons (clouds at their bases, clouds over the enemy TFs, etc.) I leave the SBD squadrens at 10% patrol just-in-case that improves their changes at finding targets.

BTW - I have almost as many patrol planes in those regions as I do dive bombers. Oh yes, and where ever I have SBDs I have plenty of escorts with equivalent ranges.

BTW II - I checked all of my air groups a while back and other than a couple of big bomber groups, all of them were fully equiped with pilots. But now that you've reminded me I'll check them again next turn.

Thanks -

Dave Baranyi

Good, sounds like the SBDs are configured correctly, as it were.

I must confess to slipping into "UV mode" with my comments on this. Unfortunately the new "explicit flank speed" feature of WitP allows TFs to move much faster, which can mean that they never appear within 4 hexes of a base. By which I mean Fast Transport, Surface Combat or Bombardment TFs.

If you can't enforce a "naval exclusion zone" with the dive bombers I would try and do it with the numerous US tac bombers.

(in reply to ADavidB)

Post #: 464

RE: Air Only Day... - 6/20/2005 1:06:50 PM

ADavidB

Posts: 2464
Joined: 9/17/2001
From: Toronto, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

Since it is an OOB bug I think it's the version you started with that matters.

Ouch! In that case I'm scr*wed because IIRC, PzB and Wobbly started this game at a very early version, maybe v1.0.

quote:

Good, sounds like the SBDs are configured correctly, as it were.

I must confess to slipping into "UV mode" with my comments on this. Unfortunately the new "explicit flank speed" feature of WitP allows TFs to move much faster, which can mean that they never appear within 4 hexes of a base. By which I mean Fast Transport, Surface Combat or Bombardment TFs.

If you can't enforce a "naval exclusion zone" with the dive bombers I would try and do it with the numerous US tac bombers.

I know what you mean about "UV Mode"...remembering UV rules instead of WitP rules has cost me a couple of times.

Thanks -

Dave Baranyi

(in reply to Captain Cruft)

Post #: 465

RE: Into the Marshalls... - 6/20/2005 1:14:52 PM

Speedysteve

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline

Hi Dave,

I believe any Engineer unit with engineers has a chance of lowering fortifications.

Regards,

Steven

(in reply to ADavidB)

Post #: 466

RE: Air Only Day... - 6/20/2005 1:16:09 PM

ADavidB

Posts: 2464
Joined: 9/17/2001
From: Toronto, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

Good, sounds like the SBDs are configured correctly, as it were.

I must confess to slipping into "UV mode" with my comments on this. Unfortunately the new "explicit flank speed" feature of WitP allows TFs to move much faster, which can mean that they never appear within 4 hexes of a base. By which I mean Fast Transport, Surface Combat or Bombardment TFs.

If you can't enforce a "naval exclusion zone" with the dive bombers I would try and do it with the numerous US tac bombers.

BTW - I forgot to mention before, I have a fair number of tac bombers in both PM, Lunga and in the Gilberts. I've also got several more of the bases in the PM-to-Lunga strip almost at level 4, and once they reach 4 I'll put some tac bombers in those bases too. Unfortunately, Allied tac bombers just don't do quite the same job as Dauntlesses do, but never-the-less they still do keep PzB a bit "honest".

Thanks again,

Dave Baranyi

(in reply to Captain Cruft)

Post #: 467

RE: Into the Marshalls... - 6/20/2005 1:17:56 PM

ADavidB

Posts: 2464
Joined: 9/17/2001
From: Toronto, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Speedy

Hi Dave,

I believe any Engineer unit with engineers has a chance of lowering fortifications.

Regards,

Steven

Great! Thanks for the confirmation. I'm hoping that by the time I get my troops to Buna my bombers will have reduced the Japanese base force there to "sashimi"...

Thanks again -

Dave Baranyi

(in reply to Speedysteve)

Post #: 468

RE: Into the Marshalls... - 6/20/2005 1:32:28 PM

Smiffus64

Posts: 105
Joined: 7/30/2004
From: Delft, the Netherlands
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ADavidB

quote:

ORIGINAL: Speedy

Hi Dave,

I believe any Engineer unit with engineers has a chance of lowering fortifications.

Regards,

Steven

Great! Thanks for the confirmation. I'm hoping that by the time I get my troops to Buna my bombers will have reduced the Japanese base force there to "sashimi"...

Thanks again -

Dave Baranyi

You need combat engineers to reduce forts, plain engineers wiil not do so. (most inf divisions will have a couple of squads, there are a few dedicated combat engineer units in the Allied oob as well)

(in reply to ADavidB)

Post #: 469

RE: Into the Marshalls... - 6/20/2005 2:50:07 PM

Captain Cruft

Posts: 3652
Joined: 3/17/2004
From: England
Status: offline

Yes it is the device called "ABC Engineer Squad" that reduces forts, as opposed to the generic device "Engineers", which builds things. These Engineer Squads can exist within any type of LCU.

What annoys me is that the base screen counts these guys as construction engineers but they can't actually build anything.

(in reply to Smiffus64)

Post #: 470

RE: Into the Marshalls... - 6/20/2005 3:09:00 PM

Speedysteve

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Captain Cruft

What annoys me is that the base screen counts these guys as construction engineers but they can't actually build anything.

I never noticed that. Thanks for the info

(in reply to Captain Cruft)

Post #: 471

RE: Into the Marshalls... - 6/20/2005 4:39:50 PM

Captain Cruft

Posts: 3652
Joined: 3/17/2004
From: England
Status: offline

No problem matey.

I just noticed something. That was your 666th post and you joined on Sep 11 2001. Hope you're not suspicious ... ;)

(in reply to Speedysteve)

Post #: 472

RE: Into the Marshalls... - 6/20/2005 4:45:48 PM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

Damn! Better get Homeland Security on the phone fast!

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Captain Cruft)

Post #: 473

RE: Into the Marshalls... - 6/20/2005 6:52:46 PM

Speedysteve

Posts: 15998
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Reading, England
Status: offline

LOL Captain. I hadn't noticed that!

Superstitious? Me? Never.

***Disclaimer no PBEM will be completed until I have posted another message. Ah I guess this one makes it 667. Ok PBEM turns may now proceed

***

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 474

RE: Air Only Day... - 6/20/2005 11:59:10 PM

ADavidB

Posts: 2464
Joined: 9/17/2001
From: Toronto, Canada
Status: offline

December 31, 1942 brought an expected turn of events. PzB is a very good player and he uses every nuance of WitP very well. For example, now that I am no longer able to realistically threaten his larger air bases with my heavy bombers, PzB has moved some of his short range "bomber killers" forward and is using them as LR CAP to disrupt my attacks on his small forward most bases:

Day Air attack on Majuro, at 83, 83

Japanese aircraft
Ki-44-IIb Tojo x 7
Ki-61 KAIc Tony x 4

Allied aircraft
SBD Dauntless x 11
P-40E Warhawk x 13

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-44-IIb Tojo: 1 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
SBD Dauntless: 5 destroyed, 1 damaged
P-40E Warhawk: 1 destroyed, 1 damaged

So, with the current aircraft designs, I have nothing to effectively counter this other than to throw all my air forces at his bases and "hope for the best". But PzB has too many mutually-supporting bases in the Marshalls so this does not appear to be a good strategy for me at that location. PzB also appears to have a carrier force sitting in the middle of the Marshalls just in case I try to send some ships into his territory.

It also seems likely that PzB has done the same thing at Lae because an "aircraft" sign has appeared there for the first time in quite a while. My guess is that PzB has put some of his short range fighters into Lae in the hopes of surprising the tac bombers that I have been sending there while I have been using my heavy bombers to hammer the Japanese base force at Buna. This time I have decided that I am not going to "roll over dead" because Lae is harder for PzB to support at a distance. Therefore, I am throwing all of my heavy bombers along with my best tac bombers and my P-38s from PM at Lae. I intend to crush the air field again.

In the meanwhile I am starting off an invasion TF for Buna. The air field at Goodenough has just gone up to level 2, so I've put a torpedo bomber group into there along with the existing fighters, and I will be landing a big armed base force in Kiriwina next turn. I intend to have eastern PNG swarming with forces. Will that be enough to counter the advantage that PzB has in his air craft? I don't really know, but I don't see what other choice I have other than to build up as many mutually-supporting bases as I can so that I can at least match him in numbers if not in airplane quality.

Otherwise, PzB caught and hit a couple more of my subs, and my sub's torpedoes continue to be duds. I still don't know how long it will be until the effect of the pre-1943 torpedoes goes away. And in other news, my minesweepers finally cleared Gili-Gili while at the same time the damaged culprit sub slowly continued to escape despite my attempts to find it with my ASW forces.

PzB wrote to me that he is now converting a couple of his CS ships to CVLs. Lucky man - I would be happy enough if the air conversion option worked in this upgraded game. I have P-35s sitting in the West Coast that are waiting for P-40Ns in order to be able to upgrade. But I do get the Essex in a couple of weeks. I just hope that it doesn't come with prototype Hellcats because I won't get replacement Hellcats until the Fall.

Dave Baranyi

(in reply to ADavidB)

Post #: 475

RE: Air Only Day... - 6/21/2005 12:00:32 AM

ADavidB

Posts: 2464
Joined: 9/17/2001
From: Toronto, Canada
Status: offline

January 1, 1943 brought one very small "moral victory" for me - PzB didn't achieve his automatic 4:1 win. Now what can I do to keep him from achieving that win this year, and in the longer run, to keep him from achieving a 3:1 win on January 1, 1944?

Well, it turns out that PzB had put a patrol planes into Lae on January 1, 1943, not fighters:

Day Air attack on Lae, at 54, 87

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft
F4F-4 Wildcat x 17
Kittyhawk I x 8
P-38G Lightning x 33
B-26B Marauder x 60
B-17E Fortress x 31
B-24D Liberator x 44

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-46-II Dinah: 1 destroyed

Japanese ground losses:
19 casualties reported

Airbase hits 1
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 32

But that's okay, air field damage went up to 100 and my pilots got some easy practice. I'm sending some of them back in again, but I'm putting the P-38s back on to LR CAP over Dobodura to protect against PzB's renewed "interest" in my shipping in the region:

Day Air attack on TF, near Dobodura at 55, 91

Japanese aircraft
G4M1 Betty x 6

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 4 damaged

Allied Ships
AK George Vancouver

And:

Day Air attack on TF, near Goodenough Island at 56, 93

Japanese aircraft
G4M1 Betty x 3

Allied aircraft
Kittyhawk I x 6

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 1 destroyed, 1 damaged

Allied Ships
AK John C. Calhoun

And finally more seriously:

Day Air attack on TF, near Kiriwina Island at 57, 93

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 9
G4M1 Betty x 30
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 6

Allied aircraft
Kittyhawk I x 5

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 2 destroyed, 1 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
Kittyhawk I: 1 destroyed

Allied Ships
AK Lew Wallace, Torpedo hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
SC SC-641
AK Starr King, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
AK Peter H. Burnett, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage

The attacks on Dobodura and Goodenough were at very long distances; the attack on Kiriwina came from Rabaul. My TF with the base force hasn't reached Kiriwina yet so there is no way for me to bring any local CAP in yet.

In a few days there will be an Air HQ in PM. That ought to help things out a bit.

Dave Baranyi

(in reply to ADavidB)

Post #: 476

RE: Air Only Day... - 6/21/2005 4:47:52 AM

marovici

Posts: 89
Joined: 5/12/2005
From: NYC
Status: offline

Although I know you said that you will not concern yourself with score and the game will continue still congrats on keeping it under 4:1. Good luck!

(in reply to ADavidB)

Post #: 477

RE: Air Only Day... - 6/21/2005 5:40:56 AM

BLurking

Posts: 199
Joined: 3/24/2005
From: Frisco, TX
Status: offline

PzB is obsessed w/ getting the auto victory. Use that to your advantage. Where can he get victory points quickly? You're in the driver's seat at this point, think of it as Japan's attempt to get the Allies to sue for peace. As long as you achieve 2:1 loss ratios, he's losing (at least in his mind). The drive to achieve auto-victory may cause him to make a mistake, the only problem is trying to decide where that mistake will occur...

(in reply to ADavidB)

Post #: 478

RE: Air Only Day... - 6/21/2005 6:05:31 AM

ADavidB

Posts: 2464
Joined: 9/17/2001
From: Toronto, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: marovici

Although I know you said that you will not concern yourself with score and the game will continue still congrats on keeping it under 4:1. Good luck!

Thanks for the support and encouragement!

Dave Baranyi

(in reply to marovici)

Post #: 479

RE: Air Only Day... - 6/21/2005 6:09:42 AM

ADavidB

Posts: 2464
Joined: 9/17/2001
From: Toronto, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BLurking

PzB is obsessed w/ getting the auto victory. Use that to your advantage. Where can he get victory points quickly? You're in the driver's seat at this point, think of it as Japan's attempt to get the Allies to sue for peace. As long as you achieve 2:1 loss ratios, he's losing (at least in his mind). The drive to achieve auto-victory may cause him to make a mistake, the only problem is trying to decide where that mistake will occur...

I suspect he is going to try to capture my troops in Burma or start another offensive in China. He has gone from pure "training" attacks to attacks on specific locations. And he has really increased his attack rate in both theaters. Man, if I tried to send as many planes out as often as he does I'd have them all in repair with morale in the teens in no time.

The other thing he is hoping for is for me to commit some major combat TFs outside of my land-based air strength. I'm not buying...

Thanks for the comments -

Dave Baranyi

(in reply to BLurking)

Post #: 480

Page: << < prev 13 14 15 [16] 17 next > >>

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> After Action Reports >> 274 Auxillary aircraft?