RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies)

RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports

Message

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/17/2009 2:05:48 AM)
The KB is safely on it's way to port for rest and replenishment. The BB bombardment force is also on it's way back to port to rearm and repair. I had to sprint at full speed for one turn to get away from any potential submarine threat that might have been there, and it resulted in some engine and system damage. Some of these ships, especially Yamashiro, seem to take engine damage just as soon as they ring up full speed. [image]local://upfiles/6829/A2DBF024ACBB4B68B36B29EEBE5649AC.jpg[/image]

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/17/2009 2:11:29 AM)
I plan to let the dockyards fix these ships up for a few turns before sending them back up north with the KB in support. By that time, the division that I am pulling out of Wenchow in southern China plus the division from Hong Kong should be abreast Honshu, and I can use them to seal the deal at Okha, then shift them to Petropavlovsk. I will, however, have some serious choices to make soon regarding my attack on Russia. It appears that he is moving a stack with 1500+ AV to attack Kotou from Bikin. I must decide whether or not to siphon off some of my 3000+ AV from my march on Rybilov to defend the valley. If I guess wrong I could become trapped or mired in contact in two different battles without enough AV to win either one. [image]local://upfiles/6829/98865A514357449C9890FB2E38513E61.jpg[/image]

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/17/2009 2:14:20 AM)
Up north, my forces are marching from Hailar towards Borzya. However, I have noticed that they do not want to take the shortest path in terms of hexes. Instead, they want to take a long and winding road through the woods. I clicked on the roads, and I think the problem might be this pink stretch of road. Does anyone know what that signifies? [image]local://upfiles/6829/FE04A4C508DB41FE858C0BA27B0551AB.jpg[/image]

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/17/2009 2:17:11 AM)
Other than this, I continued sweeps over Malaya and the Philippines. Tarakan continues to wait on reinforcements and the Dutch air force continues to make unsuccessful bombing runs on my battleships that are providing gunfire support. [image]local://upfiles/6829/F16C80CE3A7244C8AADE6A930FC290D8.jpg[/image]

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/17/2009 2:18:54 AM)
I also landed at Rabaul this turn with support from my cruisers. I don't know if I have enough strength to take it or not, but if I don't I will have the troops from Guam here in a few days to provide additional support. [image]local://upfiles/6829/586E020BFB54474B847B6AC3AFE496EA.jpg[/image]

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/17/2009 2:21:51 AM)
In China, I did take a hex near Sinkiang that had been irritating me. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ground combat at 86,49 Japanese Deliberate attack Attacking force 18528 troops, 140 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 513 Defending force 13539 troops, 71 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 342 Japanese adjusted assault: 321 Allied adjusted defense: 151 Japanese assault odds: 2 to 1 Combat modifiers Defender: terrain(+), leaders(-), experience(-), supply(-) Attacker: Japanese ground losses: 1090 casualties reported Squads: 2 destroyed, 39 disabled Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 53 disabled Engineers: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled Allied ground losses: 2686 casualties reported Squads: 165 destroyed, 2 disabled Non Combat: 107 destroyed, 24 disabled Engineers: 4 destroyed, 2 disabled Guns lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled) Units retreated 2 Defeated Allied Units Retreating! Assaulting units: 116th Division 20th Ind.Mixed Brigade Defending units: 7th Chinese Corps 84th Chinese Corps 21st Group Army [image]local://upfiles/6829/BB289B80B8F943F5B70C4B9C02A71ED7.jpg[/image]

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/17/2009 2:23:18 AM)
As I said, not as many missions flew during the turn due to the weather. Here is the summary of aircraft losses for the turn: [image]local://upfiles/6829/283274035A384673B228BFC60991EF99.jpg[/image]

TheElf -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/17/2009 5:26:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Streptokok Im just so pissed off at this: quote: Japanese aircraft A6M2 Zero x 37 Ki-27b Nate x 143 Ki-43-Ib Oscar x 14 Allied aircraft I-153 x 12 Japanese aircraft losses Ki-27b Nate: 2 destroyed Allied aircraft losses I-153: 1 destroyed Even if you didnt bring those 143x Nates, 51x Zeros and Oscars would so overwhelm 12x I-153 they would just be wiped out. [:(] There is a point of Diminishing returns when it comes to large numbers like the AAR above. In essence you have TOO many Fighters in the air to be of use against a small force. The assumption being that Some smaller portion of the MASSIVE sweep would be used to engage the small enemy CAP. The other thing working against you is the weather. In severe storms, combat can occur, but it will always be impacted by weather. I've personally flown in severe storms, and it makes things...less easy. In this case it is highly probable that, given the weather, a great number of the sweepers would not even be aware of the small CAP, due to poor visibility, or even IFR conditions throughout the region. You may have had a small break in the weather though that gave the CAP a chance to make an attack, and retire into the weather, before any retribution of the magnitude you seem to desire was possible.

rattovolante -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/17/2009 8:13:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seydlitz Up north, my forces are marching from Hailar towards Borzya. However, I have noticed that they do not want to take the shortest path in terms of hexes. Instead, they want to take a long and winding road through the woods. I clicked on the roads, and I think the problem might be this pink stretch of road. Does anyone know what that signifies? Pink means there is no actual road in the hex, but troops can march over the railroad track (or any maintenance trail along the track if they're lucky). see manual section 4.2.1.5 Move rates are (manual section 8.3.1): Art/Eng: Main road 30 - Secondary road 15 - R/R track/trail 5 - clear 10 Inf: Main road 30 - Secondary road 15 - R/R track/trail 10 - clear 10 Armor: Main road 60 - Secondary road 30 - R/R track/trail 5 - clear 10 So these units are taking the faster but longer route.

bklooste -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/17/2009 8:25:59 AM)
quote: I am still operating the Glen factory for a couple of months to make sure that I will have enough Glens for my submarines during the war. The subs tend to lose their Glens a lot and having them on there is important to recon. I did convert a couple of other factories from planes that I didn't need to planes that I did, but a prime consideration was lack of engines to support additional factories that needed HA-35 engines at start. Even if had found the factory space, it would have been to expand zero production instead of Oscars. The zeroes are far more important since they have better firepower and more importantly, equip the carriers. If the IJAAF loses, it can simply pull back and hide. If the IJNAF loses, then Japan won't be doing too much conquering. zero production instead of Oscars Why not kill the Glens and their engines and reinstate it when you get some more factories in 42 , i dont find the Glens as useful as WITP. Agree Zero is >> Oscar but not sure about the Tojo do you get it at the start like some AARs or is that scen 2 ? The firepower is needed. While Zeros are the most useful the IJAAF needs the most work on pilots.

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/18/2009 11:31:19 PM)
January 4, 1942 We started off the turn with two good sub attacks. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Submarine attack near Toboali at 50,94 Japanese Ships SS I-158 Allied Ships xAP West Point, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage xAP West Point is sighted by SS I-158 SS I-158 launches 8 torpedoes at xAP West Point [image]local://upfiles/6829/27D24059BC3442ECBB5B26B2A49CBD1D.jpg[/image]

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/18/2009 11:32:26 PM)
And the other one... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Submarine attack near Portsea at 81,172 Japanese Ships SS I-16 Allied Ships xAK Iron Master, Shell hits 3, Torpedo hits 3, on fire, heavy damage SS I-16 is sighted by xAK Iron Master SS I-16 attacking on the surface [image]local://upfiles/6829/BD99DF1EFE054D06800F1B81B0C85943.jpg[/image]

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/18/2009 11:33:41 PM)
According to the ships sunk summary I got both of these ships. [image]local://upfiles/6829/FD73EA1AD14D475B919DA8E0AD5DCF98.jpg[/image]

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/18/2009 11:34:51 PM)
In the Sea of Japan, my crack Mavis ASW unit has located several subs lurking. [image]local://upfiles/6829/27B96A1378084EAFB4C4110B349F4483.jpg[/image]

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/18/2009 11:37:58 PM)
On the Russian front, my planned raids on Rybilov went uncoordinated. My zeroes swept the target first while there were few enemy fighters. Then my escorts didn't show as planned, and finally my bombers flew head on into large numbers of waiting interceptors without escorts in several successive waves. It wasn't pretty. [image]local://upfiles/6829/E2C1D24ED0704F7FA421B59A5ED6132B.jpg[/image]

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/18/2009 11:39:10 PM)
I lost enough bombers during the turn that my opponent has made the comment about how well his biplanes are doing. That is not good. [image]local://upfiles/6829/45C70C574D8048789DD4021A24680A56.jpg[/image]

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/18/2009 11:42:24 PM)
Not much changed hands during the turn so I will move on to processing my next turn and report back in more detail from it. However, before I go, I thought that I would give you a look at a couple of things worth seeing especially if you are not a Japanese player. First, Tainan Datai....the unit that produced many of Japan's top aces. They have been fighting for almost a month in the Philippines and Korea. [image]local://upfiles/6829/BD6A0DDC5FA049FC94412A7944FCE183.jpg[/image]

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/18/2009 11:44:58 PM)
Also, I wanted you to see the state of armament and vehicle pools by the first week of January. This is another reason why I immediately expanded production of both of these pools. You need points in these if you are going to get replacements for your ground units. [image]local://upfiles/6829/435DB114CADB4CE1ABF56A5B2A3B723B.jpg[/image]

Ketza -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/18/2009 11:46:34 PM)
Are you coordinating the same flotillas and air divisions from individual bases? I typically do not have the problem of unescorted bombers.

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/19/2009 1:25:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ketza Are you coordinating the same flotillas and air divisions from individual bases? I typically do not have the problem of unescorted bombers. For the most part, yes. The biggest problem that I am having is the weather. About 60-70% of the time it is cancelling some of the escort missions and cancelling or delaying the bombing missions. This results in raids arriving with no escort and piecemeal over the targets. This is very much limited to this theater and I am pretty certain that it has everything to do with the weather in this zone.

Ketza -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/19/2009 2:23:29 AM)
Ahh I see. I had not considered that.

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/19/2009 5:06:30 AM)
Turn 30, January 5, 1942 Not a very active turn. Very little action. In Russia I had scheduled fighter sweeps only while the bombers recoup their losses. My opponent continued to Bomb Kotou. Here are the aircraft losses for the turn: [image]local://upfiles/6829/8F9AAEABA00745DAAEBF18F881466D0B.jpg[/image]

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/19/2009 5:11:52 AM)
The one thing that I did want to comment about was my cointinued attacks on his border fort unit. Fort about a week I have been attacking this unit with overwhelming force but I still can not get it to clear out of the hex or to die. I do not know if this is WAD or a bug, but it is frustrating. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ground combat at 113,43 Japanese Deliberate attack Attacking force 26378 troops, 594 guns, 623 vehicles, Assault Value = 3859 Defending force 1738 troops, 103 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 19 Japanese adjusted assault: 157 Allied adjusted defense: 1 Japanese assault odds: 157 to 1 Combat modifiers Defender: leaders(+), disruption(-), experience(-), supply(-) Attacker: Japanese ground losses: 98 casualties reported Squads: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 6 disabled Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled Allied ground losses: 1649 casualties reported Squads: 68 destroyed, 0 disabled Non Combat: 214 destroyed, 0 disabled Engineers: 20 destroyed, 0 disabled Guns lost 71 (71 destroyed, 0 disabled) Assaulting units:... 5th Infantry Regiment... 9th Division... 25th Division... 27th Electric Engineer Regiment... 11th Tank Regiment... 5th Tank Regiment... 24th Division... 9th Garrison Unit ... 12th Division... 9th Tank Regiment... 10th Tank Regiment... 4th Garrison Unit ... 2nd Manchukuo Distr Division... 57th Division... 8th Recon Regiment... 3rd Tank Regiment... 74th Infantry Regiment... 11th Division... 1st Manchukuo Division... 7th Ind. Engineer Regiment... 10th Medium Field Artillery Regiment... 11th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion... 9th Ind. Engineer Regiment... 4th Ind. Mountain Gun Regiment... 53rd Field AA Battalion... 4th RF Gun Battalion... 12th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion... 12th Medium Field Artillery Regiment... 6th RF Gun Battalion... 5th Ind.Hvy.Art Battalion... 27th Fld AA Machinecannon Company... 9th Medium Field Artillery Regiment... 6th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion... 3rd Hvy.Artillery Regiment... 4th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion... Kwantung Army... 20th Medium Field Artillery Regiment... 4th Medium Field Artillery Regiment... 1st Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion... 13th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion... 22nd Medium Field Artillery Regiment... 7th Medium Field Artillery Regiment... 7th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion... Tonei Hvy Gun Regiment... 45th Road Const Co ... 24th Fld AA Machinecannon Company... 3rd Army... 2nd Hvy.Artillery Regiment... 23rd Field AA Machinecannon Company... 20th Fld AA Machinecannon Company... 5th Medium Field Artillery Regiment... 22nd Field AA Machinecannon Company... 28th Field AA Machinecannon Company... 5th Army... 22nd Ind. Engineer Regiment... 2nd Medium Field Artillery Regiment... 54th Field AA Battalion... Botanko Hvy Gun Regiment... 45th Ind.AA Gun Co ... 2nd JAAF Base Force... ... Defending units:... 111th Region Fortress... You would think that odds of 157 to 1 would be more than enough to get the job done....[X(]

rattovolante -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/19/2009 7:34:43 AM)
Apart from 157 to 1, I think it's more relevant that if your report is approximately accurate all that's left in the hex is about 100 troops and 35 guns, about 5-10% of the original unit. And with 90% losses (in just 3 days of combat, if I understand correctly) still they didn't retire nor surrender. This looks unlikely. Also note that all his losses are destroyed devices, no disablements, this is unusual and might be a bug hint: quote: ORIGINAL: seydlitz Defending force 1738 troops, 103 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 19 Allied ground losses: 1649 casualties reported Squads: 68 destroyed, 0 disabled Non Combat: 214 destroyed, 0 disabled Engineers: 20 destroyed, 0 disabled Guns lost 71 (71 destroyed, 0 disabled) This looks quite suspect. I wonder if all that's left in the unit are any static devices, and everything else surrendered this turn (thus the destroyed units). I think you should ask the devs if this is WAD on the support or feedback forums, and/or ask your opponent if he saw anything strange on his side of the FOW.

Smeulders -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/19/2009 10:38:13 AM)
Thought you said a few turns back that your opponent sent in an infantry division to support the fort, did it get pulled back already or was it FOW ?

Sardaukar -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/19/2009 11:54:55 AM)
If it's static unit, it cannot retreat, only surrender or get annihilated. If it passes experience and leadership checks against surrender, you'll have to attack until it does not or is annihilated.

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/19/2009 2:05:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rattovolante Apart from 157 to 1, I think it's more relevant that if your report is approximately accurate all that's left in the hex is about 100 troops and 35 guns, about 5-10% of the original unit. And with 90% losses (in just 3 days of combat, if I understand correctly) still they didn't retire nor surrender. This looks unlikely. Also note that all his losses are destroyed devices, no disablements, this is unusual and might be a bug hint: quote: ORIGINAL: seydlitz Defending force 1738 troops, 103 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 19 Allied ground losses: 1649 casualties reported Squads: 68 destroyed, 0 disabled Non Combat: 214 destroyed, 0 disabled Engineers: 20 destroyed, 0 disabled Guns lost 71 (71 destroyed, 0 disabled) This looks quite suspect. I wonder if all that's left in the unit are any static devices, and everything else surrendered this turn (thus the destroyed units). I think you should ask the devs if this is WAD on the support or feedback forums, and/or ask your opponent if he saw anything strange on his side of the FOW. I plan to continue to watch this and if the craziness continues I will put a save up on the support forum. I am in the process of attacking a similar fort unit in another hex and I will see what it does also.

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/19/2009 2:29:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Smeulders Thought you said a few turns back that your opponent sent in an infantry division to support the fort, did it get pulled back already or was it FOW ? It got beat up pretty bad and retreated after it's first combat, but the fort unit stayed. This turn, he threw more units into the hex and I also pounded them to the point where they retreated, leaving only the fort unit.

seydlitz_slith -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/19/2009 2:30:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sardaukar If it's static unit, it cannot retreat, only surrender or get annihilated. If it passes experience and leadership checks against surrender, you'll have to attack until it does not or is annihilated. If this is not a bug, then the fact that you quote must be what the problem is. I also share your thought and that is why I haven't turned in a bug report yet, but I am starting to wonder. You would think that the unit would die.

Streptokok -> RE: Nomonhan Redux: Seydlitz (Japan) vs. MBatch729 (Allies) (9/19/2009 2:47:23 PM)
Bomb it with air unit to add disruption and fatigue, it will surender faster. Doesnt have to be heavy bombing, just attack it to generate disp/fat..

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

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.96875