RE: Re-organizing

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: Re-organizing

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 >> RE: Re-organizing

Page: << < prev 47 48 [49] 50 51 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Re-organizing - 11/20/2005 10:23:32 PM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

Ken said he would have to put a couple of Marine Corsair squadrons on his re-spawning carriers as they
will arrive without air groups. He also got one British carrier with Corsair - the rest will soon have Hellcats

I don't think it'll be an issue...

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to Andy Mac)

Post #: 1441

RE: Re-organizing - 11/20/2005 10:24:07 PM

pauk

Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline

great

! I feels much better right now when i know that Lex (or something like this, don't follow allied insignia) is out of action

!

_____________________________

(in reply to Andy Mac)

Post #: 1442

RE: Re-organizing - 11/21/2005 2:33:57 AM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

Does anyone know how well the George army fighter stands up against Hellcats and Corsairs - is it still
a slaughter or does the odds improve?

Unfortunately I only have a few Daitais that upgrade to Georges..at least all the pilots are crack.

I found that night fighters can be put on LRCAP over my own bases - this is a good way too use and otherwise
useless resource. They can defend bases that are within heavy/medium bomber range. Even P-38s are vulnerable
when they operate at their max range.

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to pauk)

Post #: 1443

RE: Re-organizing - 11/24/2005 2:19:03 AM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

Back from my first IS conference in Bergen, felt like a stooge when I toppled that tall
chair during my performance

Several contstruction units are being re-located - to New Guinea. Want to build forts in
every single base there and prepare for siege warfare.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 07/17/43

Air Combat

With soo many bases to defend there are always 'weak spots'. The Army Air Force
hit Port Moresby today. Mission cost 13 Sallys (6 aa, 6 flak, 1 ops) and 3 Zeros but
claimed 61 ac on the ground. In all 79 Allied ac were destroyed today. 35 C-47s among
them.

Not a decisive blow, airfield damage at 15 - but morale and supply levels will suffer and
Ken has to move more fighter to protect PM.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Port Moresby , at 53,91

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 27
J1N1-R Irving x 6
Ki-21 Sally x 149

Allied aircraft
F4F-4 Wildcat x 8
Boomerang II x 9

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 1 destroyed, 1 damaged
Ki-21 Sally: 9 destroyed, 13 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-4 Wildcat: 4 destroyed
Boomerang II: 4 destroyed, 1 damaged
B-24D Liberator: 4 destroyed
Catalina I: 1 destroyed
C-47 Dakota: 17 destroyed
B-17E Fortress: 2 destroyed
Beaufort V-IX: 5 destroyed
P-70A Havoc: 3 destroyed

Allied ground losses:
38 casualties reported

Airbase hits 15
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 32
Port fuel hits 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Got a shot at the Hobart today!

Day Air attack on TF, near Gili Gili at 56,94

Japanese aircraft
G4M1 Betty x 3

Allied aircraft
Kittyhawk I x 7

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 2 destroyed

Allied Ships
CL Hobart

Aircraft Attacking:
1 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

PM Hit!

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1444

Long lance menace! - 11/24/2005 6:15:57 PM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

A two day update:

Over the last few days a large number of heavy Allied surface vessels have been
spotted near Salamua and Gasmata - covered by strong formations of Corsairs.

Ken almost encouraged me to hit him with my fleet...smelling a wiener I decided to
change tactics:

70 crack naval bombers at Wewak and the Admirality Islands were ordered to strike,
escorted by Oscar IIs. My reasoning: a reasonably strong escort will allow some bombers
to get through. Escort losses will be abhorent no matter what ac I use.

Read on an see how the plan played out....

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 07/18/43

Sub/ASW Attacks

Ordered the I-4 to mine Buin - she comes accross a dangerous asw group
and decides to attack. Silly, silly...sinks right away. Only comfort is that her
mines sank a sub chaser moments after.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Buin at 64,92

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

Allied Ships
MSW Cowra
MSW Warrnambool
MSW Deloraine
MSW Wollongong
SC SC-645
DE Edward C. Daly
DD Fletcher
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 1082 encounters mine field at Buin (64,92)

Allied Ships
MSW Warrnambool
MSW Deloraine
MSW Wollongong
MSW Cowra
SC SC-645, Mine hits 1, on fire, heavy damage *sinks*
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Air Combat

Heavy air strikes all over the line in the South!

Day Air attack on Lae , at 54,87

Allied aircraft
F4F-4 Wildcat x 17
Boomerang II x 18
B-25J Mitchell x 14
B-17E Fortress x 72

No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
46 casualties reported

Airbase hits 1
Runway hits 54
Port hits 4
Port supply hits 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 07/19/43

Air Combat

The first group to go in meets a fierce CAP but some of the bombers
get through. Damage to the heavy cruiser Shropshire doesn't seem serious though.

Day Air attack on TF, near Gasmata at 59,90

Japanese aircraft
G4M1 Betty x 6
G4M2 Betty x 3
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 10

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 38

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 2 destroyed, 2 damaged
G4M2 Betty: 3 destroyed
Ki-43-IIa Oscar: 6 destroyed

Allied Ships
CA Shropshire, Torpedo hits 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
41 of my best naval bomber crews approaches the US battleline near Salamua.
The 27 Oscars dance a deadly dance with Corsairs and Spits...losses are pretty bad
but more than 20 bombers break through and head straight for the modern battleships
Massachusetts and Washington! *tension*

Day Air attack on TF, near Salamaua at 54,88

Japanese aircraft
G4M1 Betty x 15
G4M2 Betty x 26
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 27

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 35
Spitfire Vb x 14

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 9 destroyed
G4M2 Betty: 14 destroyed
Ki-43-IIa Oscar: 16 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair: 4 damaged
Spitfire Vb: 3 damaged

Allied Ships
BB Washington, Torpedo hits 4, on fire, heavy damage Yeah, who's your daddy now

BB Massachusetts
DD Claxton
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF, near Salamaua at 54,88

Japanese aircraft
G4M1 Betty x 3
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 6

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 25
Spitfire Vb x 9

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 2 destroyed
Ki-43-IIa Oscar: 3 destroyed

Allied Ships
MSW Kelowna

Aircraft Attacking:
1 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF, near Gili Gili at 56,94

Japanese aircraft
G4M1 Betty x 4

Allied aircraft
Kittyhawk I x 12

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 1 destroyed, 2 damaged

Allied Ships - LSTs are valuable and effective ships.
LST LST-338, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage

Allied ground losses:
9 casualties reported
Guns lost 2

Aircraft Attacking:
3 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF, near Tarawa at 85,91 - a weak cap over Tarawa
is immediately exploited...results are poor, but Ken will get the point! Keep
your CAP up - everywere!!

Japanese aircraft
G4M1 Betty x 3

Allied aircraft
P-40N Warhawk x 1

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 1 damaged

Allied Ships
AK Antares
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

USS Washington takes one!

I grinned wickedly as lance after lance slammed into the Washington, leaving her
dead in the water. A coastal sub will race in and try to deliver the 'coupe de grace'.
Buna or Gili Gili are her only emergency harbours. Anyway, another one of Ken's
battleships are out of the fight! Quite costly, 49 bombers and fighters - but it's worth it.
The war of attrition is going pretty well for the time being.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1445

RE: Long lance menace! - 11/24/2005 7:07:32 PM

pauk

Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PzB
-

Day Air attack on TF, near Salamaua at 54,88

Japanese aircraft
G4M1 Betty x 15
G4M2 Betty x 26
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 27

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 35
Spitfire Vb x 14

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 9 destroyed
G4M2 Betty: 14 destroyed
Ki-43-IIa Oscar: 16 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair: 4 damaged
Spitfire Vb: 3 damaged

Allied Ships
BB Washington, Torpedo hits 4, on fire, heavy damage Yeah, who's your daddy now

Can't believe what i see! Ken is going slightly mad, i guess...

You are really most brilliant player or most lucky player on the world. Or both

. Congrats! BANZAI!

quote:

ORIGINAL: PzB

Does anyone know how well the George army fighter stands up against Hellcats and Corsairs - is it still
a slaughter or does the odds improve?

Unfortunately I only have a few Daitais that upgrade to Georges..at least all the pilots are crack.

hmmm... no... but i did some test in the past with Franks against Kittyhawks:

I'm testing frank vs corsair right now (different exp level).

So far i done with frank vs kittyhawk. I was little bit suprised because frank is supposed to be better plane. Both missions were performed ad 20.000 ft (Frank and Kittyhawk)

#1. sweep mission over the San Jose.

12 franks (leader had something about 80/90 ratings/best suited for air transport)- overall exp 64.

vs

12 kittyhawks (leader 64/74; best for the bomber sq. leader) - overall exp 68.

#1a 2 frank destroyed; 1 Kittyhawk destroyed
#1b 3 frank destroyed; Kitty no loses

#2. Sweep mission over SJ

32 frank (same leader); exp 60 and something vs 12 Kittyhawks (same leader, exp level of the group 68)

#2a 4 franks destroyed; 3 kittyhawks destroyed

and latter tried with Corsairs. Didn't find results, but IIRC Corsairs kicked Franks. I'm guessing that will be a case with George too.

_____________________________

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1446

RE: Long lance menace! - 11/25/2005 2:38:57 AM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

Thx Pauk,

Ken has to push forward - but it's me that decides where and when to strike back.
Being on the offensive, even if it's just in the counter attack role, is a great advantage as it's possible to mass
enough strength to achieve results even in 1943-44.

It's a bit unconcerting to inflict too heavy casualties though. I always get this 'super Jap' weapon or game
bias flung back at me. Getting a bit tiresome..perhaps I should just sit back and die like I'm supposed to?

Sounds like the Frank isn't much better than the Tojo - the George should be a bit better. Would be great if you
managed to run some more tests. In the near future I may need a 'sharp tool' in my armory.

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to pauk)

Post #: 1447

RE: Long lance menace! - 11/25/2005 3:51:16 AM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

Told Ken that it wasn't my 'super' torpedo bombers that caused the Washington so much
damage yesterday. It was more a result of cause and effect: by placing a high value SC TF
at Salamua - a size 1 forward base - he was asking for trouble.

To be honest I would say Ken took a risk that he shouldn't have and it didn't take brilliant
play from me to punish him.

Todays turn was not a good one..two mistakes cost me 40 ac and 2 minelayers.
If you make mistakes you pay the price

There are now some 35k troops at Salamua - will be difficult to keep the grunts in supply.
At Gasmata there are another 40k. I expect an advance over land. Is Allied logistics up to this?

Tomorrow the Yamato arrives at Truk together with the Haruna and 6 of my best destroyers.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 07/20/43

Air Combat

Here is something you rarely see! I tried really hard to catch the severly damaged
Washington, and this effort included Emily's on night air attack. Just as good it didn't work,
would have given Ken the fits

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on TF at 55,89

Japanese aircraft
H8K Emily x 9

Japanese aircraft losses
H8K Emily: 1 destroyed, 4 damaged

Allied Ships
BB Washington, on fire, heavy damage

Aircraft Attacking:
1 x H8K Emily launching torpedoes at 200 feet
3 x H8K Emily launching torpedoes at 200 feet
4 x H8K Emily launching torpedoes at 200 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Air Combat

My first mistake of the day...
The night fighters I sent to Salamua were ordered to attack by night - but
somehow they went out during daylight and slaughtered themselves. Ouch!
All 9 escorting Zero's with an average exp of 82 were shot down - well, 2 pilots
came back.

Day Air attack on Salamaua , at 54,88

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 9
Ki-45 KAIa Nick x 28

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 36
Spitfire Vb x 10

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 9 destroyed
Ki-45 KAIa Nick: 22 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair: 1 damaged
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think this strike went after the Washington or the Massachusetts battlegroup,
non of the attackers made it through the CAP though.

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

Japanese aircraft
G4M1 Betty x 3
G4M2 Betty x 3
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 4

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 20
Hurricane II x 13

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M1 Betty: 3 destroyed
G4M2 Betty: 3 destroyed
Ki-43-IIa Oscar: 2 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1 Corsair: 1 damaged
Hurricane II: 1 damaged
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My second error: a mine laying TF didn't turn due north after mining Madang
and was hit by 57 heavy bombers on surface attack. Cost me 2 ml's. Not happy.

Day Air attack on TF at 55,83

Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 30
B-24D Liberator x 27

No Allied losses

Japanese Ships
ML Kyosai, Bomb hits 1, on fire
ML Takashima, Bomb hits 7, on fire, heavy damage
ML Aotaka, Bomb hits 4, on fire, heavy damage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Emily's on night duty

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1448

RE: Long lance menace! - 11/25/2005 7:19:52 AM

Mynok

Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

Man, I've *never* had a night naval attack even fly.

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1449

RE: Long lance menace! - 11/25/2005 8:16:19 AM

Gen.Hoepner

Posts: 3645
Joined: 9/4/2001
From: italy
Status: offline

Every time i look at this AAR i find these incredible numbers about corsair...with this rate of losses you're gonna be out of good pilots very soon. Yes,i know there's the training Camp up there in China, but anyhow im still amazed how these corsairs kick everything that fly in front of their nose!

Good attempt with your emilies! Those guys can be devastating !!! If i was you i'd train a pair of group of Emilies up to their 90s....and then wait for a great night-naval attack when his CVs will come around again... You need something like 83/84 exp level to succesfully fly( and locate the target) at night...but something more to hit it...with 90 you're almost sure one torp will make it!

_____________________________

[image]http://yfrog.com/2m70331348022314716641664j [/image]

(in reply to Mynok)

Post #: 1450

RE: Re-organizing - 11/25/2005 4:01:58 PM

Tom Hunter

Posts: 2194
Joined: 12/14/2004
Status: offline

Why do you need to know about Georges and Franks, you are doing fine with Oscars.

Were the Oscar pilots high quality or garbage?

Nomad is going to start having moral problems now. Do BBs regenerate like CVs or is he using up a non-renewable resource?

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1451

RE: Re-organizing - 11/25/2005 4:45:09 PM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

Experience is the key regarding Emilies Mynok - that and appropriate targets. Seldom I get mid ocean intercepts
like this. The group had an avg exp of 83-84 me thinks. I'll go over my other squadrons and try to find someone with
higher exp levels. Attrition at the front lines makes it hard to get it much higher.

I'm afraid that you may be right Tom, Oscars are performing just as badly against Corsairs as any other ac

The Daitai that escorted the Bettys in the Washington strike had just arrived from China with an avg of 75 exp. They didn't
shoot down anything, but they did attract much attention from the CAP - perhaps they survived long enough to make a difference?

It is as you say Hoepner, if you engage in A2A combat in mid 1943 you find yourself out of parachutes in no time. So if you think
your experiences in Burma are scary.....

My solution is to keep a core of veterans sitting in the Philippines as a reserve. Then I constantly train, fight and rotate my other fighter
and bomber Daitais. As soon as they loose ca 70% of their pilots it's back to boot camp. This way all the crack pilots usually survive and
forms the nucleus of the next batch.

Heavy cruisers and carriers re-generate, the first take 2 years to come of the production lines. Battleships on the other hand is a much
rarer commodity. So Ken will not get any respawns. Kinda reminds me of Doom... So he may have to use the fast Iowas
in a bombardment role in the future and damage to any of them will seriously cripple his surface combat ability - esecially as there are 12
Jap dreadnought still afloat.

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to Tom Hunter)

Post #: 1452

RE: Re-organizing - 11/25/2005 6:08:53 PM

String

Posts: 2661
Joined: 10/7/2003
From: Estonia
Status: offline

And he won't get the sizeable RN reinforcements in late 44 early 45 either.. unless he liberates india ofcourse.

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1453

The end? - 11/25/2005 10:50:38 PM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

Got this email from Ken today:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems that this connection is no good either. I am only able to connect about 4 hours per day and I will not pay for that.
I do not know if it is the WiFi connection I am trying to use or my equipment but they say there is nothing wrong with their
equipment and I have no resources to check/repair mine.

the bottom line is that I have no internet connection and will not have one for at least 2 years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So it seems like we're on hold again..perhaps permanently!?
Doesn't seem like the Gods of War want me to finish this game

I will give Ken another couple of days to find out whether there are other options, but in the mean time I will have
to think about the future of this game.

If Ken doesn't come back online, should I call it quits or try to find yet another opponent?
There is not going to be a 3-1 victory for Japan on 1/1-44, so I guess Japan still can be defeated - but by whom?

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to String)

Post #: 1454

RE: The end? - 11/25/2005 10:57:34 PM

Speedysteve

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

I feel for you John. Can't be nice having to keep finding new opponents for various reasons. Hope all works out well.

Steven

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1455

RE: The end? - 11/26/2005 12:24:54 AM

Arstavidios

Posts: 780
Joined: 11/19/2004
Status: offline

Hi, lost my first Japanese opponent and am waiting for news of the second one, so I'm available if you need an other vict......., ahem allied opponent

(in reply to Speedysteve)

Post #: 1456

RE: The end? - 11/26/2005 1:37:35 AM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

Thx Steven, it is a bit..unfortunate but there's really nothing much to do about it.

Nice of you to offer to take up this rather 'messy' game Arstavidios! Never had an opponent from Europe before, that
could make things easier. You're from...France?

Let's see what happends over the next few days, have to clear things with Ken and consider other potential opponents.
The task of being CinC of the Allied forces in this game is a big challenge in many ways. The game will probably reach a
climax within a year or so. The most important thing for me would be to find someone who is not only a capable Allied player,
but also a reliable one that likes to discuss game results and live with how the game works. Kinda tired of hearing about how
unrealistic this and that and everything is each time something unexpected happends. Takes a bit of humor and self irony I
guess

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to Arstavidios)

Post #: 1457

RE: The end? - 11/26/2005 1:43:56 PM

Gen.Hoepner

Posts: 3645
Joined: 9/4/2001
From: italy
Status: offline

It's a pity

_____________________________

[image]http://yfrog.com/2m70331348022314716641664j [/image]

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1458

RE: The end? - 11/26/2005 3:33:06 PM

Rob Brennan UK

Posts: 3685
Joined: 8/24/2002
From: London UK
Status: offline

If i wasnt running 3 other PBEMS i'd love to play allies against you PzB

. Wow the fame and notoriety of actually beating you

.

Although im not sure im good enough to be brutally honest( see my AAR) . You do seem to grind players into the ground.

and no internet connection for 2 years ! WTF .. where does he live ? in a cave somewhere ? . anyhoo good luck and i really really hope this great AAR comes to a conclusion someday.

_____________________________

sorry for the spelling . English is my main language , I just can't type . and i'm too lazy to edit :)

(in reply to Gen.Hoepner)

Post #: 1459

RE: The end? - 11/26/2005 4:17:24 PM

castor troy

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

plz dont let my favourite aar die!

(in reply to Rob Brennan UK)

Post #: 1460

RE: The end? - 11/26/2005 4:42:06 PM

Sneer

Posts: 2654
Joined: 10/29/2003
Status: offline

I would take as it was extremaly interesting AAR.... but I'm unfortunately heavily specialized in Japan side

_____________________________

(in reply to castor troy)

Post #: 1461

RE: The end? - 11/26/2005 7:33:18 PM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

Appreciate the support guys!

I'm pretty keen on finishing this game as well and a few setbacks will not be enough to de-rail this
baby; there are several potential takers already!

Not heard anymore from Ken, so I'll screen the applications
and appoint a new CinC for the Allied side by tomorrow if he remains silent.

I hope the next - and last? Allied commander will stick with it until the bitter end (for me:) and perhaps document
how Japan can be reduced despite the heavy losses inflicted early on in the war.

To be continued....

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to Sneer)

Post #: 1462

RE: The end? - 11/26/2005 7:37:53 PM

Arstavidios

Posts: 780
Joined: 11/19/2004
Status: offline

Uhuh, I'm still volunteering for the shlaughterhouse

What does not kill you makes you stronger

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1463

New Allied CinC - 11/27/2005 8:48:05 PM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

I've had to make a very difficult decision: there were several high quality candidates for the position as Allied CinC.
In the end I handed the job to Andy Mac. I've been reading his AAR and he seems like a very capable player and is also in
the same time zone as me.

Hostilities should be commencing shortly

Would like to use the opportunity to thank Ken for doing a great job over the last 6 months despite a difficult strategic situation

Also a big thanx to the rest of you that offered to take over from Ken! It's almost unfortunate that I couldn't hire more than one of you...

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to Arstavidios)

Post #: 1464

RE: New Allied CinC - 11/27/2005 9:00:31 PM

String

Posts: 2661
Joined: 10/7/2003
From: Estonia
Status: offline

Go Andy !!!!

Indeed, he should be quite capable, he should be quite aquianted with rescuing the allies from desperate situations by now

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1465

RE: New Allied CinC - 11/27/2005 10:18:30 PM

pauk

Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PzB

In the end I handed the job to Andy Mac. I've been reading his AAR and he seems like a very capable player and is also in
the same time zone as me.

Unforutnatly I can't read his AAR

, but from my experience based on our game I can second that he is very capable player.

_____________________________

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1466

RE: New Allied CinC - 11/27/2005 11:42:16 PM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

I'm pretty sure Andy will do a fine job

Since Andy has read my AAR he knows my plans and dispositions, so I'm going to
stand down and observe for a while. Need to learn how my new opponent plays.

So I'll be needing advice on how to proceed; we need new plans and new directives
to throw Andy of guard.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 07/21/43

Surface Combat

My sub laid mines claims another victim!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 1082 encounters mine field at Salamaua (54,88)

Allied Ships
MSW Warrnambool
MSW Deloraine
MSW Wollongong
MSW Cowra
DE Edward C. Daly, Mine hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Air Combat

I had originally planned another naval attack against Salamua, even brought battleships
to the party. These would have to move one hex beyond the Admirality Islands so I decided to
stage with cruisers only. Then Ken quit.

Some 80 odd fighters were on CAP over the ships but they suffered heavily at the hands of almost
100 Lightnings and heavy/medium bombers that suddenly streamed in. The Oscars were helpless as
usual, only the Zekes stood up to the challenge and claimed most of the P-38s. I've attached a summary
of todays losses at the end of this report.

One light cruiser and two destroyers were damaged but will all make it safely home. I could still have sent
my cruisers to Salamua, but Andy will be expecting me - so I'm not.

Day Air attack on TF, near Admiralty Islands at 58,84

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 11
A6M5 Zeke x 21
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 35
Ki-45 KAIb Nick x 15

Allied aircraft
P-38G Lightning x 68
B-25J Mitchell x 48

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 5 destroyed, 1 damaged
A6M5 Zeke: 3 destroyed, 2 damaged
Ki-43-IIa Oscar: 22 destroyed
Ki-45 KAIb Nick: 8 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
P-38G Lightning: 16 destroyed, 16 damaged
B-25J Mitchell: 4 destroyed, 10 damaged

Japanese Ships
CL Kitakami
CA Takao, Bomb hits 3
CA Furutaka
DD Yugure, Bomb hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
CA Chokai, Bomb hits 2
CA Atago
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The heavies just continue to stream in...

Day Air attack on TF, near Admiralty Islands at 58,84

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 3
A6M5 Zeke x 9
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 5

Allied aircraft
P-38G Lightning x 30
B-17E Fortress x 27
B-24D Liberator x 28

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 4 destroyed
A6M5 Zeke: 3 destroyed
Ki-43-IIa Oscar: 4 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
P-38G Lightning: 6 destroyed, 5 damaged
B-17E Fortress: 4 damaged
B-24D Liberator: 7 damaged

Japanese Ships
CL Kitakami, Bomb hits 2, on fire
CA Furutaka
CA Takao, Bomb hits 2, on fire
CA Chokai, Bomb hits 1, on fire
DD Yugure, on fire, heavy damage
DD Natsushio, Bomb hits 1
CA Atago
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF, near Admiralty Islands at 58,84

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 2
A6M5 Zeke x 15
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 7

Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 15

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress: 5 damaged

Japanese Ships
BB Hiei, Bomb hits 1
BB Musashi
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The battleships simply shrugs of the 500 lb bombs. No damage whatsoever

Day Air attack on TF, near Admiralty Islands at 58,84

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 2
A6M5 Zeke x 15
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 7

Allied aircraft
B-24D Liberator x 27

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-43-IIa Oscar: 1 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
B-24D Liberator: 23 damaged

Japanese Ships
BB Kongo
BB Mutsu, Bomb hits 1
BB Hiei, Bomb hits 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, my bombers did not get through. Time to stand them down and await new opportunities

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

Japanese aircraft
G4M2 Betty x 11

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 15
Hurricane II x 12

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M2 Betty: 8 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
Hurricane II: 2 damaged
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Todays air losses

As you can see Oscars and Lightnings went down in droves today...

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to pauk)

Post #: 1467

RE: New Allied CinC - 11/27/2005 11:43:48 PM

Wolfie1

Posts: 360
Joined: 12/22/2004
From: Blackpool, England
Status: offline

Ye Gods! How many Allied players are you going to demoralise PzB

_____________________________

Teamwork is essential - it gives the enemy someone else to shoot at.....

(in reply to pauk)

Post #: 1468

RE: New Allied CinC - 11/27/2005 11:51:27 PM

PzB74

Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline

Sometimes they demoralize themselves...and I think it's my turn this time

_____________________________

"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to Wolfie1)

Post #: 1469

RE: New Allied CinC - 11/28/2005 12:00:13 AM

Speedysteve

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

Good luck John,

Despite me being very busy. I was going to offer myself as an opponent. Glad to see you have found someone tho. I'll continue to watch with interest

Steven

_____________________________

WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester

(in reply to PzB74)

Post #: 1470

Page: << < prev 47 48 [49] 50 51 next > >>

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> After Action Reports >> RE: Re-organizing