RE: West Wind, Clear

RE: West Wind, Clear (Full Version)

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

Message

2ndACR -> RE: West Wind, Clear (2/23/2008 7:17:06 PM)
I was really worried about the air transports of his. I keep a ton of Dakota's and assorted transports in India for fast deployments forward. It really allows the allied player to concentrate his combat forces for rest, but allows him to rapidly fly them where needed. And it being 9/42, he has a ton of transport a/c available to him. I would make some fast transport TF's and have them evac as much of that division as possible. But I also do the same as the Japanese. Keep a healthy fleet of Tabby's in areas that allow me to rapidly fly in help or evacuate troops from a base. I can keep troops away from most air attacks to recover, yet be able to rapidly respond back forward if needed.

Hortlund -> RE: West Wind, Clear (2/24/2008 12:01:20 PM)
Well, this little adventure has convinced me that I need to build up a strategic reserve. Right now I dont have any reserves, only units deployed in forward defensive positions. If I had more units I could push on and take Ceylon, all I would need is one more division. I have such a division, but it is three weeks out, and that makes it pointless to continue the attack. I am turning back the 1st and 2nd paras, and I ordering the evacuation of the bridgehead at Trincomalee. I turned my surface combat TF into a fast transport TF and managed to lift roughly half of the landed units. whats left on the beach right now is a contingent of roughly 1/4th of the division. I will withdraw to the Andaman Islands to refuel my carriers, and then I will return with a transport TF to rescue whatever can be salvaged of the troops ashore.

Hortlund -> RE: West Wind, Clear (2/24/2008 12:04:15 PM)
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 09/08/42 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sub attack near Trimcomalee at 15,25 Japanese Ships AP Hakozake Maru PG Hashidate MSW Tama Maru MSW Ataka Maru MSW Asahi Maru #2 MSW Aoi Maru DD Akizuki CA Aoba Allied Ships SS KXII -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Day Air attack on TF at 15,23 Allied aircraft B-26B Marauder x 17 Allied aircraft losses B-26B Marauder: 3 damaged Japanese Ships CA Chikuma AP Kashiwa Maru, Bomb hits 1, on fire DD Kuretake AK Muroran Maru Aircraft Attacking: 1 x B-26B Marauder bombing at 6000 feet This attack scared me. The B-26s are dropping 1000-pounders...that makes them a threat to all my shipping. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Day Air attack on TF at 18,25 Allied aircraft B-26B Marauder x 9 No Allied losses Japanese Ships PG Muro Maru AP Rozan Maru AP Saiho Maru, Bomb hits 3, on fire, heavy damage Aircraft Attacking: 1 x B-26B Marauder bombing at 6000 feet Same here. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ground combat at Mannargudi Japanese Deliberate attack Attacking force 1189 troops, 2 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 38 Defending force 0 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 0 Japanese max assault: 28 - adjusted assault: 5 Allied max defense: 0 - adjusted defense: 1 Japanese assault odds: 5 to 1 (fort level 2) Japanese forces CAPTURE Mannargudi base !!! Im going to march all my units to Trivandrum and build a little Alamo there. The base has some resources so I should get free supply every day.

Hortlund -> RE: West Wind, Clear (2/24/2008 3:44:09 PM)
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 09/09/42 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Day Air attack on 225 Group RAF , at 30,28 Japanese aircraft A6M3 Zero x 26 Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 3 Ki-21 Sally x 9 Ki-49 Helen x 67 Japanese aircraft losses Ki-21 Sally: 1 destroyed, 3 damaged Ki-49 Helen: 11 destroyed, 45 damaged Allied ground losses: 181 casualties reported Aircraft Attacking: 17 x Ki-49 Helen bombing at 11000 feet 6 x Ki-49 Helen bombing at 11000 feet 11 x Ki-49 Helen bombing at 11000 feet 10 x Ki-49 Helen bombing at 11000 feet 8 x Ki-21 Sally bombing at 11000 feet 12 x Ki-49 Helen bombing at 11000 feet Look at this. Seriously. Look at this. This is an airstrike on the telephone pole. Im using only level bombers at 11k. The result? I lost something like 20 bombers and as many damaged. How many AA guns does that stack walk around with? These losses are worse than when I try to bomb one of his airfields. There will be no more strikes on the telephone pole. This is just a senseless slaughter of my bombers.

jwilkerson -> RE: West Wind, Clear (2/24/2008 5:12:52 PM)
Yeah looks like 100s at least of heavy flak - a.k.a. the NE Indian Mobile Flak Army is comming to town! (sorry for the bad advice - I let thoughts of reality get in my head waaaay too often - and also I haven't played NikMod in a full PBEM campaign either - in the GuadMod - we didn't have huge stacks like this)

Hortlund -> RE: West Wind, Clear (2/24/2008 6:00:21 PM)
Heh, its ok. I was impossible to know it was bad advice before trying anyway...who suspected he would bring his entire AAA armory with him down the trail to Akyab. I wonder if my little adventure in India has made him change his plans for Burma. Judging from our email conversations regarding the India debacle, I think its safe to say that he thinks Im a complete retard when it comes to all things WITP [:D] (he doesnt use those exact words though).

ny59giants -> RE: West Wind, Clear (2/24/2008 6:45:40 PM)
Once the Allied medium bombers (B-25 Mitchells and B-26 Marauders) get over 70 experience levels there is a die roll that they go through to have the chance to upgrade their bomb load for that mission from 500 to 1000 lb. [X(] I'm playing CHS Nik Mod and in it the Allies in India have lots of light and then again half as many heavy AA flak LCUs to move around. Not a nice place to visit for the Japanese LBA. [:(] Plus, large Allied BF (Aviation Support of 90) carry up to 32 x 90mm AA guns plus the light stuff. Just ask my opponent as he paid a visit to Luganville shortly after I finally moved back in. I had two large BF plus some American AA units along with my fighters. KB lost over a CV worth of planes for that visit alone. Not many fighters, but he's having trouble getting new pilots to man his Vals. [:D] The moral of the story is....India has some serious flak. [:-]

jwilkerson -> RE: West Wind, Clear (2/24/2008 7:13:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund Heh, its ok. I was impossible to know it was bad advice before trying anyway...who suspected he would bring his entire AAA armory with him down the trail to Akyab. I wonder if my little adventure in India has made him change his plans for Burma. Judging from our email conversations regarding the India debacle, I think its safe to say that he thinks Im a complete retard when it comes to all things WITP [:D] (he doesnt use those exact words though). Well if he's right then he'll be camping in Tokyo by 7 Dec 1942 and you'll be put out of your misery! [:D]

Jim D Burns -> RE: B17s on nav attack (2/24/2008 7:16:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yakface There is a problem with Nikmod, this version and the earlier version (both of which I have played). Unfortunately it takes so many hits to down a bomber that the Allied 4E end up either getting through or aborting long before they are destroyed. In trying to reduce the all aircraft losses 4E have become almost invulnerable - lots of damaged planes, very few brought down. At least in part it is a problem with the narrow range of damage each plane inflicts during an attack. If it were more variable, then some would still be destroyed. But that is historically accurate. The worst raid of the war in terms of downed heavy bombers was the 2nd Schweinfurt raid. 291 bombers took off and 59 were shot down and one ditched in the channel. Almost all the bombers were damaged, but only 60 were lost as a result of air to air action. That’s just 21% of the raid downed by air to air action. But you have to remember, the two Schweinfurt raids were attacked over and over by hundreds of German fighters (some fighters engaged the raid three times that day) as the bombers traversed hundreds of miles of enemy territory. No raids like that were ever flown in the Pacific. At most bombers were over hostile air space for just a matter of minutes, except for Japanese bombers flying deep into China. Bomber losses generally tended to be in the 1%-2% category for most raids flown during the war, and if a squadron lost 10% of its planes in a month it was considered combat ineffective for weeks.. Expecting to wipe out all attacking bombers with your fighters in one day is extremely unrealistic. 1st Raid:: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schweinfurt-Regensburg_mission 2nd Raid: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Raid_on_Schweinfurt#_note-0 Bombers accuracy should be toned way down, but fighter’s ability to shoot them down is still far too high, even in nik mod. Jim

Q-Ball -> RE: B17s on nav attack (2/24/2008 7:34:12 PM)
Jim, good points. Do you have a sense for what kind of losses the Japanese incurred on bombing missions? I suspect much higher than the Allies, but I don't have a sense for what that number is.

Hortlund -> RE: B17s on nav attack (2/24/2008 7:52:18 PM)
Some good news today. His B-26s impaled themselves on my KB CAP. AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 09/11/42 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Day Air attack on TF at 17,31 Japanese aircraft A6M2 Zero x 191 Allied aircraft B-26B Marauder x 24 Japanese aircraft losses A6M2 Zero: 39 damaged Allied aircraft losses B-26B Marauder: 24 destroyed Amazing. Two things amaze me. 1) I managed to shoot down bombers. 2) They did not turn back. Their morale must have been extremely high since they kept coming until they were all shot down. These are the guys I have seen using 1000-pounders earlier...so I hope they were very experienced too. A nice surprise in this depressing India-adventure. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Day Air attack on TF at 19,31 Japanese aircraft A6M2 Zero x 40 Allied aircraft B-26B Marauder x 6 Japanese aircraft losses A6M2 Zero: 2 damaged Allied aircraft losses B-26B Marauder: 5 damaged First sign of lower morale, they turn back after 5 damaged bombers. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Day Air attack on TF at 18,30 Allied aircraft B-26B Marauder x 6 No Allied losses Japanese Ships AP Saiho Maru, Bomb hits 3, on fire, heavy damage Aircraft Attacking: 2 x B-26B Marauder bombing at 6000 feet 4 x B-26B Marauder bombing at 6000 feet They manage to pick off a lone, damaged, straggler. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Day Air attack on TF at 16,31 Japanese aircraft A6M2 Zero x 10 Allied aircraft B-26B Marauder x 3 No Japanese losses Allied aircraft losses B-26B Marauder: 1 damaged And their once excellent morale seems to be in shambles...they turn back at the first sound of the guns. [image]local://upfiles/1562/5D5A6EB4162C4204AB6AFAA4F2A9DF8D.jpg[/image]

Hortlund -> RE: B17s on nav attack (2/24/2008 7:54:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns Bomber losses generally tended to be in the 1%-2% category for most raids flown during the war, and if a squadron lost 10% of its planes in a month it was considered combat ineffective for weeks.. Expecting to wipe out all attacking bombers with your fighters in one day is extremely unrealistic. Marianas turkey shoot?

Hortlund -> RE: B17s on nav attack (2/24/2008 8:52:43 PM)
One interesting thing I just found out after looking at the operations report is that not a single pilot in the KB managed to shoot down 2 bombers today. 191 fighters on CAP, 25 kills, and no one with more than one kill.

Jim D Burns -> RE: B17s on nav attack (2/24/2008 10:49:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund Marianas turkey shoot? The Marianas Turkey Shoot isn’t really a bombardment with large bombers. Rather it was lots of small naval strikes with obsolete Japanese planes opposed by massed modern US fighter planes. The first strike had 68 Japanese planes, 25 were shot down. It was intercepted a second time and another 16 were shot down, the survivors then launched their ineffectual attacks. The second raid consisted of 109 planes and 70 were shot down. The third raid consisted of 47 planes, 7 were shot down. The fourth raid consisted of 67 planes, 39 were shot down. So out of a total of 291 aircraft flown in the four raids, 150 were lost in air to air combat (about 52%). A lot more were lost to flak, and are usually counted in the tallies to inflate the story. Now there was lots of other fighting during the day that brought the total number of Japanese planes involved in the “Turkey Shoot” to 373 aircraft, but as far as offensive strikes go only 291 were in the four raids. Were the planes flying the naval attacks medium or heavy bombers and not flimsy single engine obsolete air frames, I doubt half as many would have been lost, even to the vaunted Hellcats. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Philippine_Sea In the end, the examples of Schweinfurt and the MTS are extreme examples and nowhere near the average results. On average only 1%-2% of strike aircraft were lost during opposed raids, from all causes, not just air to air. Jim

bbbf -> RE: B17s on nav attack (2/25/2008 4:36:55 AM)
IIRC, for some mysterious reason, flak units NOT in base hexes are far more effective than those at bases.

witpqs -> RE: B17s on nav attack (2/25/2008 5:29:40 AM)
Maybe because they are only covering units, not units plus facilities? Just guessing.

Zebedee -> RE: B17s on nav attack (2/25/2008 5:58:27 AM)
Not strictly relevant to this thread, but it might be of interest to those (like me) who gulp when they see bomber losses. Bomber Command (flying at night in the main) flew 392137 sorties in WW2. It lost 10724 aircraft. ie roughly a 3% loss rate from all causes overall. Losses from a raid were considered acceptable if they were under the 5% mark. At least those Mitchells were flying unescorted and not low enough to evade CAP and skip-bomb! I'm still trying to figure out how to shoot down 4 engines myself - the results against the KB are very encouraging though. In my games vs AI, B-17s flying at 18000 feet occasionally make horrid holes in my CVs because the chances are that they'll shoot down the zeros before the zeros shoot them down!

Hortlund -> RE: B17s on nav attack (2/26/2008 11:21:44 AM)
Another handful of turns has gone by. Nothing of particular interest has happened. A B-17 strike on Lae, but thats about it. Parts of the 5th Div are still trapped on the beach at Trincomalee. I am torn whether I should try to save them or not. I think I must at least try, but on the other hand I am not particularily keen on putting the KB into harms way again. The reason? The allied CVs. If they have been rushed to the area, they should be about a week away now. That means they could appear right in the middle of an evac operation. To have the KB caught between LBA from Ceylon and the allied CVs coming up from the Indian Ocean is a nightmare scenario. I am torn on the question, but as things stand right now I believe I will keep my fleet safe under LBA protection.

2ndACR -> RE: B17s on nav attack (2/26/2008 3:50:15 PM)
Well, you could use fast transport TF's using some DD's to do the evac. That way they will scoot in at night and be out of LBA range at daybreak. Use 2-3 TF's of 6 DD's each and you can grab most of the remaining troops.

Q-Ball -> RE: B17s on nav attack (2/26/2008 4:27:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 2ndACR Well, you could use fast transport TF's using some DD's to do the evac. That way they will scoot in at night and be out of LBA range at daybreak. Use 2-3 TF's of 6 DD's each and you can grab most of the remaining troops. Wouldn't they be in range of B-26s out of Trincomalee? They have a range of 6, so those DD's would be vulnerable twice, on the inbound and outbound trip. And the way they are flying, I think they could cause some damage. I suppose you could LRCAP them from Port Blair, or from a CVE or two to take the edge off.

Hortlund -> RE: B17s on nav attack (2/26/2008 5:11:05 PM)
I could try a fast transport, but it would be suicide without CAP from the KB. Which brings me back to my reluctance to put the KB in any position outside friendly aircover.

Q-Ball -> RE: B17s on nav attack (2/26/2008 5:53:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund I could try a fast transport, but it would be suicide without CAP from the KB. Which brings me back to my reluctance to put the KB in any position outside friendly aircover. You could LRCAP it without endangering KB, you only need to be within 12 hexes or so from Trincomalee to do that. But, even with a large CAP, some bombers would likely get through, and if they are carrying 1000lb bombs like a few are, one hit might be enough to sink a DD, or cripple it enough to be finished off next turn. I would probably leave them, if you have the parent unit at least you can park it on Saipan or something so it rebuilds for later in the war.

Hortlund -> RE: West Wind, Clear (2/26/2008 8:01:14 PM)
Sendai just made it to port. This is her condition. Rangoon is a lv6 port with 40k supplies, an AR and a naval HQ is present. Think she will make it? [image]local://upfiles/1562/40ED3EF034BF46D8ABE10C6DDFE8E0EF.jpg[/image]

Q-Ball -> RE: West Wind, Clear (2/26/2008 8:31:33 PM)
Oooh, close one. I am going to say YES, but you'll know next turn. The fires should be put out in port, and the float is barely enough to withstand another turn of flooding.

Nikademus -> RE: West Wind, Clear (2/26/2008 9:07:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jwilkerson Yeah looks like 100s at least of heavy flak - a.k.a. the NE Indian Mobile Flak Army is comming to town! (sorry for the bad advice - I let thoughts of reality get in my head waaaay too often - and also I haven't played NikMod in a full PBEM campaign either - in the GuadMod - we didn't have huge stacks like this) Its possible to 'abuse' the change by uber-stacking. Players should decide if or what restrictions they want to do on stacking AA units , same as with air units. That or try bombing at a higher altitude. 11k is rather low against a well defended target.

Nikademus -> RE: West Wind, Clear (2/26/2008 9:19:29 PM)
players should bear in mind too....that one of the main purposes of the increased flak potential was to disabuse players of the standard mass-low level attack so effective in stock. Usually from ultra low 6k. 11k is "higher", but still a tad low if attacking a well defended target. The only way to acheive such a discomfort is via loss and damage. Does this make flak guns a tad more effective in terms of actual "kills" in some situations? yes. Does it sometimes force more realistic air tactics? yes. Can you uberstack? yes. on the same token though, can you uberstack a CAP or bomber force or a fighter sweep into the hundreds of planes? yes. Is flak's capablity fully represented in the code? no. is the intimate relationship between fighter defence and flak fully represented? no. Ultimately its a balance/compromise act. Overall though it does tend t slow the max-effort type strategies

Gen.Hoepner -> RE: West Wind, Clear (2/26/2008 9:23:09 PM)
I think the CHS nik's advanced experimental mod is the best compromise you've done Nik[;)]

Nikademus -> RE: West Wind, Clear (2/26/2008 9:31:32 PM)
well gosh...i'd take credit but the CHS "experimental" was actually done by Andrew Brown. He based it on alot of what i did and I provided some info/help/advice in regards to what tweaks what in the editor. Some stuff has been used for AE too. Its all good. You can still send a coupon for a free Latte to me though if you like. Always need more cafeeeene. [:D]

jwilkerson -> RE: West Wind, Clear (2/27/2008 4:07:57 AM)
It would be nice if heavy flak being dragged down a jungle trail could not shoot with the same intensity as flak fully emplaced with deployed central battery directors and radar support. Maybe the "AE Flak Team" can work on this issue! Hey MichaelM hey Nik ... when is the next meeting! [:D]

witpqs -> RE: West Wind, Clear (2/27/2008 4:39:37 AM)
You're gonna take a lotta flak for that one...

Page: << < prev 10 11 [12] 13 14 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.625