Enemy Communication

Enemy Communication (Full Version)

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

Message

John 3rd -> Enemy Communication (2/22/2010 3:26:03 AM)
Just sent this to the guys: I'm cool about a truce, however, our AAR got chimed in that if we agree to a truce then units shouldn't be evacuated through China from the DEI. If this is good then why not? It will provide time for the players to move troops and establish priorities. Instead of a 30 day warning, I would recommend simply agreeing to a truce OF 30 Days. That should give time for China to be less intimidating. Should air combat still be allowed? I HATE CHINA! John PS Michael is working tomorrow and I will be home after 3pm so I'll handle the turn when it arrives. How is that Turn ONE Allied headache going? PPS I would love to--at some point--see a screenshot of what we did at Pearl! That was a nasty looking attack. Didn't like that lone Daitai of Kates attacking in the afternoon but they really delivered with 11 Torp hits. Cannot believe it was ALL TT! Funny how Manila was then all 800 Kg bombs...rather strange.

JuanG -> RE: Enemy Communication (2/22/2010 8:47:47 AM)
I tend to favour building up 2 or 3 locations outside of the HI for naval yards - these are normally Manila, Hong Kong and Takao. Saigon is a poor choice to expand beyond 20 or so because the larger ships cannot get to Saigon, so it only needs to handle a CA and a few DDs at worst. Singapore when you get it is worth expanding enough to fit your largest ships (Yamato's) but that should only be a few points. The advantage of larger yards in my opinion is if you have them and only need something smaller, you can use the extra capacity to "rush" repairs on ships smaller than the yards capacity. Regarding shipbuilding, really the amount of expansion you need depends on what you want out of that shipbuilding que. Personally I agree that ~100 to 150 points (~300-450 HI) is about all you can afford unless you look into increasing HI (possibly at the expense of turning off some LI). There is more oil on the map than in stock, mainly due to the increased production in the HI, Manchuria and other Japanese regions, so theoretically you could sustain a more HI focused industry, and it would run more efficiently (supplies/resources wise) than the current one. The problem is that industrial expansion is a huge drain on supplies, and youll need those elsewhere.

bklooste -> RE: China Thoughts (2/22/2010 9:19:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Q-Ball Before you convert alot of Merchant Shipyards to Naval, do an analysis in tracker. I think you'll find that the early surplus disappears quickly and later turns into a deficit if you don't halt any builds. In WITP that wasn't a problem as you could turn off all merchant construction turn 1 and NEVER have a problem, but there is less of a margin in AE (though there is still one). I think you can afford SOME conversion, but don't go overboard. Just know that you won't be able to build all the merchant ships in queue. I wouldn't expand shipyards a whole lot, not because of the supply expenditure, but because they consume ALOT of HI, and you need to be building a surplus each turn throughout 1942 to account for pilot training, and to build more engines and planes. FYI, my experience in production...if there is one thing you are short in turn 1, it's ENGINES, particularly Ha-35s, but also the 32s and 33s. Take a real close look at expanding those! I'm not the expert, but that's my 2 Yen anyway. Note the 43 and 44 ramp up by Japan thats a lot of Merchant yards and in AE it matters. One other point halting a ship that is more than 365 days away has no impact. Merchant Ship Production (in tons) Year United States==========Japan 1939----------376,419------320,466 1940----------528,697------293,612 1941--------1,031,974------210,373 1942--------5,479,766------260,059 1943-------11,448,360------769,085 1944--------9,288,156----1,699,203 1945--------5,839,858------599,563 Total------33,993,230----4,152,361

n01487477 -> RE: China Thoughts (2/22/2010 9:22:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bklooste quote: One other point halting a ship that is more than 365 days away has no impact. Sorry that is just incorrect ...

bklooste -> RE: China Thoughts (2/22/2010 9:34:07 AM)
"ships only start using naval points when they are a year or less from completion. Beyond that, the points are free. The WITP AE team has given Japan enough naval points to build what they did historically. If you stop Shinano, you will have extra build points, but not until she would have started using them, which is 365 days from completion" Bradley7735 quote: ORIGINAL: n01487477 quote: ORIGINAL: bklooste quote: One other point halting a ship that is more than 365 days away has no impact. Sorry that is just incorrect ...

n01487477 -> RE: China Thoughts (2/22/2010 9:37:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bklooste "ships only start using naval points when they are a year or less from completion. Beyond that, the points are free. The WITP AE team has given Japan enough naval points to build what they did historically. If you stop Shinano, you will have extra build points, but not until she would have started using them, which is 365 days from completion" Bradley7735 Sorry,bklooste - this is not right ... I've just done a test, which I knew would confirm what I thought. Is Bradley7735 even part of the Dev team anyway? Furthermore, It just doesn't make sense anyway, cause that means any vessel of durability {edit}+37, will not be part of the points system when it starts building ... check it for yourself... You want me to post my results or will you take my word and Tracker reputation [;)]? [quote13.4.1 JAPANESE SHIP PRODUCTION All ships remove 1 day of delay when the delay is greater than: ปป 10 * Ship Durability This automatic delay removal does not cost Naval or Merchant shipyard points. Those ships set for normal construction with a delay less than 10 * Ship Durability require Naval or Merchant shipyard points equal to their durability to remove 1 delay (each day). If set to accelerated production, the ship will remove 2 days of delay (each day) for a cost equal to 3 times its durability. A ship that has a delay over 10 * Ship Durability and less than 30 * Ship Durability may be accelerated. It will remove 1 additional delay (other than the free 1 delay removal) each day for a cost of appropriate shipyard points equal to the ship’s durability.quote] [edit 2] -Also for any others wanting to understand have a look at my tutorial on the subject http://sites.google.com/site/n01487477/ae-extra-files/shipproduction.swf?attredirects=0 (IE users need to download first) [edit 3] - John and Michael, if you haven't read this ... do so. I've looked at it and it's pretty good for air coordination http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2382494

JuanG -> RE: China Thoughts (2/22/2010 10:39:08 AM)
I have no idea where the the 'less than one year' myth started, but that is all it is. Damian is right, and that little snippet he posted is exactly how it works. I've also tested this, and it was the same way back in WITP too if I remember right. I -wish- we didnt have to spend naval points on things over a year away...

bklooste -> RE: China Thoughts (2/22/2010 1:36:40 PM)
Should have tested that bumb steer.. Time to shut off some ships.

John 3rd -> RE: China Thoughts (2/23/2010 4:02:00 AM)
Juan and Damian--Thanks for the clarification. I've been around long enough to have heard this same 365 Day comment several times back in WitP. No disrespect for anyone. The whole point of these AAR is to LEARN through discussion, questions, and commentary. Am always happy to see this happen. Look at what happened yesterday with my shipyard conversion/expansion thoughts?! STILL WAITING on Allied Turn Two. Ken is done and the other good Commander is TRYING to get done!

n01487477 -> RE: China Thoughts (2/23/2010 4:26:05 AM)
Yeah, I should apologise to bklooste for being a bit in his face with my semi-harsh rebuff. John knows me well enough to realise that I usually explain things fairly well and am mostly very accepting of others opinions... Prior to Juan's post, I was looking to be a little conservative with the economy. But having done a bit of an econ survey and sent some info to Michael about the potential, he gave me the green light to "light the fires and kick the tires" of this economy, with a planning proposal. Of course this depends heavily on what happens in the next month of fighting. So we're going to see if we can stoke the fires in '42 and bring her up to warp 4, starting by '43 ... (Warp 5, might push it too much for a game I'm not involved in ... ) Brief will be sent to C&C's sometime after I get back to korea tomorrow and sometime later to the forum. So I look forward to the challenges ahead & hope the gallery will ask question as much as they like ... I just hope I'm up to answering it all ...

PaxMondo -> RE: China Thoughts (2/23/2010 4:38:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: n01487477 Yeah, I should apologise to bklooste for being a bit in his face with my semi-harsh rebuff. John knows me well enough to realise that I usually explain things fairly well and am mostly very accepting of others opinions... Prior to Juan's post, I was looking to be a little conservative with the economy. But having done a bit of an econ survey and sent some info to Michael about the potential, he gave me the green light to "light the fires and kick the tires" of this economy, with a planning proposal. Of course this depends heavily on what happens in the next month of fighting. So we're going to see if we can stoke the fires in '42 and bring her up to warp 4, starting by '43 ... (Warp 5, might push it too much for a game I'm not involved in ... ) Brief will be sent to C&C's sometime after I get back to korea tomorrow and sometime later to the forum. So I look forward to the challenges ahead & hope the gallery will ask question as much as they like ... I just hope I'm up to answering it all ... Looking forward to seeing this analysis. Be intereseting to compare how you approach it as opposed to what I have done on my own. Thanks.

John 3rd -> "Engage" (2/23/2010 3:18:20 PM)
Thank You Economics Minister. My vote is for you to "make it so" with advancing the throttles to Warp 4. BANZAI! If this is to be a REAL attempt at solid economic expansion I want to troll your mind with some thinking/proposals: 1. Expand HI in Manchuria, Formosa, and China to keep too much pressure off of Japan. 2. Limited HI expansion within Home Islands 3. Gain as much HI, resources, and oil from the 'normal' conquests to support the expansion 4. Look to 'distant' objectives for a bonus that cannot be held long for a temporary boost into Warp 5/6 The taking of Malaya, DEI, Java, all of Burma, Noumea, and NW Australia are a given. They WILL occur and we can plan that into the economy. As to the 4th Point: A. Taking Northern China is the thinking Michael and I have for gaining more oil, HI, and some resources. B. The Perth area looks quite nice for boosting the economy some. C. Would the capture of NE Aussieland from Townsville north accomplish much towards these goals? Are there other places on the map that can provide decent bang for the economic buck? This is the true focus of the question in planning our expansion. Michael and I both see this as an economic war. He will 'deal' with most of the economic targets but we need clear planning so we get there with more then enough troops and planes to grab things quickly. I will do a massive over-extension of the perimeter and then build-up the 'real' line while leaving enough forces to slow an Allied counterattack. The Offensive is a wonderful thing but I do not intend to be crazy. Adm. Benoit is a major help in keeping my feet on the ground. The hope is to have all objectives met before monsoon weather and then look to force some sort of major engagement if we have to. The real hope is to sink a couple of US CVs without taking major losses and then see what our opponents are made of. Should be interesting.

John 3rd -> RE: "Engage" (2/23/2010 3:21:36 PM)
STILL WAITING on the turn.... [sm=cool0013.gif]

Canoerebel -> RE: "Engage" (2/23/2010 3:24:22 PM)
[:(]

PaxMondo -> RE: "Engage" (2/23/2010 3:55:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: John 3rd ... The real hope is to sink a couple of US CVs without taking major losses ... My thinking for JAP is pretty much what you outlined, with this as the key point. Do you have any specific plans to make this happen, or is it more of a reaction to circumstances?

John 3rd -> RE: "Engage" (2/23/2010 4:34:08 PM)
Pax--It is my fervent hope to get something in the first week to ten days. The agressive move directly south from Pearl Harbor stands a good chance of surprisingly Ken. Remember that I choose to launch at PH from the SW so I'm already half a day's steaming southwards from where most KBs start. Many Allied players run with their CVs and those Transport TFs for Suva, Canton, or Pago Pago in their first days after the attack. This is precisely where I am going with my initial landings (Canton). I'd rate the chance of catching a lone US CV at about 60% or so. The KB will move briskly south directly past Palymyra towards Canton. They will then sweep south of Canton and threaten Pago Pago while I am landing at Canton. These are the Japanese Invasion plans and use of the KB as a Covering Force. It is NOT because I know the American deployment. They coincide but are not directly related. Course Ken could be more agressive with his CVs and move towards Wake as some Allied players like to do. Doubt if that will happen but one must play in the factors that we don't know the exact OOB for the Pacific Fleet. We know at least two lone CVs are at sea with another pair on the West Coast. This is pre-war intelligence so it is only good right NOW. As to Wake and Guam, I am going to scrape up shipping for the Wake Invasion from the Marshalls. It is not a pressing need but I will do it within a few days so those Marines are not an issue. Guam will be taken care of once a Naval Guard arrives at Saipan. Those boys will then dispatch Guam and move south. I've decided on making solid use of my Paras. Once Rabaul is grabbed the Paras will stage out of Lunga and capsure Luganville. I'll build-up Luganville and then use them again to take Efate and a base on New Caledonia. The Paras at Maleolap will grab Baker, I'll airlift in a BF, and then look to use them on the islands NW of Pago Pago. Should be unnerving as an Allied player to have to worry about a vertical envelopement from 1,000 miles away! Got to love those Mavis and Tina Transports! Michael will detach the Shokaku to Truk once the Mersing Landing is solidly ashore. When that CV reaches Truk I'll reform KB into two CV TF of 3 CVs with a pair of BB/BC as escorts. For the first couple of months they will be powerful enough to handle any American CVs in the south. About mid-February I'll re-organize again into something much stronger.

John 3rd -> Invasions (2/23/2010 4:46:32 PM)
Going back to the earlier Post: Does anyone have good ideas for economic expansion through invasion? How about Pros and Cons of the following locations: 1. NE Australia 2. New Zealand 3. Eastern India 4. Alaska 5. Northern vs Southern China 6. Perth area 7. Ceylon 8. USA West Coast (HAH! Did that for Nemo! [8D]) If plans are made from square one then one, two, or three of these targets are feasible. Remember that they are not to be held for the long-run. We know that these may be grabbed, used, and occupied for--say--12-18 months of time.

Canoerebel -> RE: Invasions (2/23/2010 5:06:05 PM)
I don't think there are any economic reasons to invade any of those destinations. The costs would likely be far greater than any industrial benefits derived. The only reason to target any of those places is as a part of a well-thought-out campaign with a major objective - IE, you can go for NZ if your objective is to sever the Oz/USA LOC; or Perth if your objective is to severl the OZ/India-Capetown LOC; or Ceylon if you wish to disrupt the British; etc. There might be good reasons to go after NE Oz as part of a bigger strategy, but frankly I cannot envision one. NE Oz puts you right in the sights of the massed Allied ground and air units that call SE Oz home. You give the Allies easy-to-reach targets on which to inflict damage, attrit your forces, and build experience.

PaxMondo -> RE: "Engage" (2/23/2010 5:10:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: John 3rd Michael will detach the Shokaku to Truk once the Mersing Landing is solidly ashore. When that CV reaches Truk I'll reform KB into two CV TF of 3 CVs with a pair of BB/BC as escorts. For the first couple of months they will be powerful enough to handle any American CVs in the south. About mid-February I'll re-organize again into something much stronger. I'm with your thinking until this point. Even if you do get 1 CV (and that would be great BTW), that still leaves 3 USN CV's. I've not had good experiences with 1:1 CV ratios. Even at 1.5:1.0 ratios it has been a bit dodgy for me by June '42. Could you elaborate for me a bit on this? Is the 3 CV TF's only for a couple months, or ....? Thanks.

John 3rd -> RE: "Engage" (2/23/2010 5:57:59 PM)
Dan--I concur regarding cost benefit issues and sound planning. This is why I am sounding out the Forum for input and then Michael and can talk strategy. I am leary of the massed troops in Australia too! NW Aust and Perth is decent and somewhat defensible for a period of time. Beyond that I am not sure. Pax--IF we can bag a US CV early, I will look to forming the 2 CTF into 3 CV elements for separate Ops. If not, I am leery of splitting them until the American Carriers have been a bit more cut down to size. This will resolve itself probably by Dec 20th or so for choice-making. Once KB makes a Port call, I will re-organize the TF so all my eggs are not in one basket and them have them travel together. We got the turn and I ran it. We had a STF of 2 CA seriously tear-up some Philippine shipping. Have to go for a Care Conference regarding my Dad at Good Samaritan so won't be able to add more commentary until I get back home.

John 3rd -> CAs in the FRAY! (2/23/2010 10:52:51 PM)
The Philippines have a rather wild and crazy round. As we have written about, I have 4 STF set to operate trying to engage fleeing Allied shipping. There are 3 STF built around a Mogami 6" CL and 3 DD as well as a pair of CA that were culled from the KB-3 (CVL-CVE). Since this player wasn't sure what the Allies would do, I ordered the CAs to cut through the middle Philippines and head for the Sulu Sea where the other 3 STF are moving as well. Due to positioning the 3 STF won't be on station until tomorrow and the CAs were simply right THERE. The turn reflected this: My CruDiv ran into 4 separate TF trying to clear the Philippines! Each red 'x' shows the steady westward movement made by the CAs and where they encountered the enemy shipping. The order of the encounters were: 1. Five smaller xAKL with all sunk very quickly. 2. A small and large AK with a TK all sunk. 3. Three US Four-Pipers (Pope, Ford, and Pillsbury) with two of the DDs hit. 4. Convoy of 2 PG and 2 AKL where 1 PG is sunk, the other hit, and an AK damaged. Was curious why the CAs didn't do more to the last TF until I looked. They simply ran out of AMMO! Too many targets to deal with. To get them rapidly back into the fray they are ordered to Cam Rahn Bay. One night of work and they sink 5 xAKL, a small AK, large AK, TK, and one PG. Nice work! The CVs over here are Michael's so he can detail their contribution to the fighting in this sector as well. The map shows his KB-3 moving south to cover Amboina and KB-2 moving east to cover Mersing: [image]local://upfiles/18041/13D68B7A217B406899C84DA4054BDB30.jpg[/image]

John 3rd -> A Sniff... (2/23/2010 11:01:07 PM)
WISH I could find out if anything else sank at PH or Manila this day! Recon showed over 30 ships still in Manila so, hopefully, a Betty strike will raise some HELL! The KB movements and notes detailed below: [image]local://upfiles/18041/FB8564FCECC442EBB95F65F2611B16B4.jpg[/image]

ny59giants -> BB Hyuga....Hit! (2/24/2010 9:30:17 PM)
Dec 8: BB Hyuga is hit! ASW/Subs: SS KXII is unable to hit any of the transports unloading at Singora. SS KXI at Kota Bharu gets in amongst the warships and receives one direct hit from DCs. Carriers: Mini-KB ends up in a surface engagement during daytime vs 3 American DDs - DD John D. Ford, DD Pillsbury, DD Pope, Shell hits 1 (engaged at over 24,000 by CA Takao and CA Maya [X(]) off the NE corner of Mindanao. 23(0) A6M2 Zero vs 3(0) B-17D Fortress ends in a draw. 12 D3A1 Val are needed to sink xAK Capillo and 9 B5N2 Kate take on xAKL Latouche, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk and xAKL Kanlaon II, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk. KB2 - moved 9 hexes west from Luzon and is joined by 2 BCs. Malaya: Kota Bharu - FMSV Brigade is the target of 51 Ki-21-IIa Sally and 30 Ki-48-Ib Lily escorted in by 28 Ki-27b Nate from Singora. They easily sweep past 1 Buffalo I on CAP. quote: Allied ground losses: 188 casualties reported Squads: 0 destroyed, 14 disabled Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 16 disabled Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled The same brigade is the target of 18 Zero escorting in 23 G3M2 Nell and 13 G4M1 Betty to force their way through 4(1) Buffalo I. quote: Allied ground losses: 49 casualties reported Squads: 0 destroyed, 6 disabled Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 1 disabled Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled Guns lost 1 (0 destroyed, 1 disabled) The morning air attacks are still not over as 39 Ki-21-IIa Sally and 18 Ki-48-Ib Lily escorted in by 12 Ki-27b Nate. quote: Allied ground losses: 33 casualties reported Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 6 disabled Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled Guns lost 1 (0 destroyed, 1 disabled) Airbase hits 4 Airbase supply hits 3 Runway hits 18 The Allies finally launch their strike against the ships unloading and their protective warships. 32(0) Nate are on LRCAP and are able to do their job vs 4(0) Buffalo I, 7(3) Blenheim I, 4(1) Blenheim IF, 12(0) Blenheim IV, and 3(0) Hudson I. quote: Japanese Ships CA Tsurugi BB Hyuga xAK Hokusho Maru BB Ise CA Atago The dreaded TBs show up and the brief smile on my face as they came in unescorted changes. [sm=00000002.gif] 10(0) Ki-27b Nate try to stop 4(1) Vildebeest III from getting launch position on BB Hyuga, Torpedo hits 1. Damage is 12-59(52)-0-0 BASE CAPTURED!! 25:1 odds are enough to take ownership. The base has minor damage of2-18-0. Invasion TFs - Off the coast from Kote Bharu, both the Kuantan and Mersing TFs are close enough to be under assault. 4(1) Blenheim I and 3(0) Hudson I miss two transports. Luzon: Clark Field - 20(0) Zeros sweep in at 19,000 vs CAP of 8(3) P-35A and 9(1) P-40B Warhawk. A late group of 6(0) Zero sweep in to find only 4(1) P-40E Warhawk remaining on CAP. Manila - 20(0) Zero sweep aside 23(5) P-40E Warhawk on CAP. Aparri - A few lonely FPs are on CAP over the transports. 6(2) F1M2 Pete are roughly handled by 5(0) P-40E Warhawk. 2(1) F1M2 Pete remain on CAP as 9(0) P-40B Warhawk escort in 2(0) B-17D Fortress to make an attempt to hit xAK Sydney Maru #2, which they don't. BASE CAPTURED!! It was empty. [;)] Cagayan - From Mini-KB a small attack at the home of those B-17s is launched by 6(0) A6M2 Zero and 18(0) B5N2 Kate. quote: Airbase hits 3 Airbase supply hits 4 Runway hits 17 SRA (East): Nothing yet, but ships are on their way to Ambon and Morotai Notes: The lose of BB Hyuga will be felt, but as long as she makes Camrahn Bay safely, it is only a temporary lose.

FatR -> RE: BB Hyuga....Hit! (2/24/2010 9:52:03 PM)
That's an incredibly lucky attack and torpedo hit, however you look at it. But with the system damage this low, Hyuga should be able to survive.

ny59giants -> RE: BB Hyuga....Hit! (2/24/2010 10:40:37 PM)
Dec 9: Buffaloes die in mass![:)] ASW/Subs: I-154 sinks TK Semiramis off Palembang I-154 gets her second sinking with TK Iris Carriers: Mini-KB runs into 2 American DDs during the night and both run away. [:D] They are found by 11 Val later in the day - quote: DD John D. Ford, Bomb hits 3, and is sunk DD Pope, Bomb hits 3, and is sunk KB2 is now within range of Malaya (able to send most of a Daitai of Zeros as LRCAP over transports - see below comments) Malaya: Invasion TF (located 3 hexes ENE of Kuantan) - I have 18(0) A6M2 Zero, 5(0) Ki-27b Nate, and 14(0) Ki-43-Ib Oscar on LRCAP to face off vs 10(2) Buffalo I. The next wave of Allied planes arrive. 18(0) A6M2 Zero, 1(0) Ki-27b Nate, and 14(0) Ki-43-Ib Oscar on LRCAP face 10(4) Buffalo I and 5(1) Swordfish I. No ships are attacked. More fighters are sent in. I still have 18(0) A6M2 Zero, 1(0) Ki-27b Nate, and 14(0) Ki-43-Ib Oscar on LRCAP as 8(2) Buffalo I are encountered. Still seeing more attacks as 17(0) A6M2 Zero, 1(0) Ki-27b Nate, and 13(0) Ki-43-Ib Oscar still are on LRCAP to go up against 8(2) Buffalo I escorting in 5(2) Swordfish I. No ships are attacked. Alor Star - 15th Indian Brigade is the target of 75(3) Ki-21-IIa Sally (without escort [:(]) faces a surprise of 3(0) H81-A3 on CAP. I look forward to face off vs AVG in Malaya. [8D] quote: Allied ground losses: 14 casualties reported Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled Vehicles lost 1 (0 destroyed, 1 disabled) Kuantan - 22nd Indian Brigade is the target here as pre-invasion attacks commence. 4(0) Ki-27b Nateand 28(0) Ki-43-Ia Oscar escort in 45(0) Ki-48-Ib Lily. The don't inflict any casualties. Luzon: Invasion TFs - One of two invasion TFs headed for San Fernando runs into 4 PT Boats and they avoid combat. The same group of PT Boats run into another transport TF and one of them is sunk. This transport group runs into 6 more PT Boats and they avoid combat. At Vigan, the British DDs show up and torpedoes are launched fast and furiously. quote: Japanese Ships CL Abukuma DD Natsugumo, Shell hits 1 DD Minegumo DD Asagumo, Shell hits 1 DD Murasame DD Harusame, Shell hits 1 DD Yudachi DD Samidare Allied Ships DD Scout, Shell hits 3 DD Thanet, Shell hits 1, on fire DD Thracian, Shell hits 2 15(0) Betty launches torpedoes at DD Thracian and DD Thanet without success. The transport are targeted again. At San Fernando, 2 Ki-27b Nate cannot slow down 3 P-40E Warhawk escorting in 6 B-17D Fortress who drop bombs at 2 x xAKs, but miss both. Clark Field - 20(1) Zero repeat yesterdays performance and do a sweep at 19,000. A mixture of Allied fighters are on CAP - 3(1) P-26A, 3(0) P-35A, 9(1) P-40B Warhawk, and 9(1) P-40E Warhawk. 6(0) Zero sweep in vs 1(0) P-26A, 1(1) P-35A, and 1(0) P-40B Warhawk. Manila - 18(0) Zero only dance with 2(0) P-40E Warhawk. After being shut out due to poor weather yesterday, some of the Nell/Betty are able to visit the port. 15(0) A6M2 Zero sweep aside 3(1) P-40E Warhawk so 4(0) G3M2 Nell and 15(0) G4M1 Betty can hit those ships still left in port. quote: Allied Ships xAP President Madison, Bomb hits 1 xAKL Compagnia Filipinas, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk xAKL Princess of Negros, Bomb hits 1, on fire CL Raleigh, Bomb hits 2, heavy damage SS Tarpon, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk AO Pecos, Bomb hits 1 San Fernando - Landings commence SRA (East): How can ONE lonely DD do so much damage?? Off of Morotai quote: xAKL Tomozono Maru #3, Shell hits 2, and is sunk PB Kure Maru #5, Shell hits 5, on fire xAK Nittai Maru, Shell hits 2, heavy fires sunk xAK Shinkoku Maru xAK Shinwa Maru xAKL Ujigawa Maru, Shell hits 1, heavy fires xAKL Heiwa Maru, Shell hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage sunk xAKL Hitora Maru, Shell hits 9, heavy fires, heavy damage sunk xAKL Higari Maru, Shell hits 3, on fire xAKL Genmei Maru xAKL Daitei Maru, Shell hits 2, heavy fires xAKL Taiyu Maru PB Hakata Maru #2, Shell hits 3, on fire Allied Ships DD Stewart, Shell hits 1 Japanese ground losses: 836 casualties reported Squads: 7 destroyed, 19 disabled Non Combat: 18 destroyed, 72 disabled Engineers: 2 destroyed, 4 disabled Guns lost 2 (1 destroyed, 1 disabled) Revenge is swift and painful! [sm=00000055.gif] quote: CS Chiyoda BB Nagato BB Mutsu BB Tosa BB Kaga All come from her 41cm main guns! DD Shiratsuyu DD Shigure DD Hatsuharu DD Nenohi DD Mikazuki DD Yakaze DD Wakatake DD Kuretake DD Kaosame Allied Ships DD Stewart, Shell hits 6, and is sunk Notes: Air Losses show a total lose of 30 Buffalo (20 in 2a2). Kuantan landings will start tomorrow. [image]local://upfiles/15133/2F7CB01C319F4CFBB3AC0735C4EE808F.jpg[/image]

bklooste -> RE: Invasions (2/25/2010 6:55:05 AM)
The Mount Isa area in NE Australia is quite nice though you could only hold it a year and Resources only no oil or HI but about 400 or so. quote: ORIGINAL: John 3rd Going back to the earlier Post: Does anyone have good ideas for economic expansion through invasion? How about Pros and Cons of the following locations: 1. NE Australia 2. New Zealand 3. Eastern India 4. Alaska 5. Northern vs Southern China 6. Perth area 7. Ceylon 8. USA West Coast (HAH! Did that for Nemo! [8D]) If plans are made from square one then one, two, or three of these targets are feasible. Remember that they are not to be held for the long-run. We know that these may be grabbed, used, and occupied for--say--12-18 months of time.

Yakface -> RE: Invasions (2/25/2010 11:18:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bklooste The Mount Isa area in NE Australia is quite nice though you could only hold it a year and Resources only no oil or HI but about 400 or so. quote: ORIGINAL: John 3rd Going back to the earlier Post: Does anyone have good ideas for economic expansion through invasion? How about Pros and Cons of the following locations: 1. NE Australia 2. New Zealand 3. Eastern India 4. Alaska 5. Northern vs Southern China 6. Perth area 7. Ceylon 8. USA West Coast (HAH! Did that for Nemo! [8D]) If plans are made from square one then one, two, or three of these targets are feasible. Remember that they are not to be held for the long-run. We know that these may be grabbed, used, and occupied for--say--12-18 months of time. The limiting factor long term on Japans HI pool is fuel. Extra HI is somewhat useful to build a reserve of HI points in the bank for use later. Japan has no need for further resources. After the SRA there really is nowhere to go to get extra oil, so expanding to further build your economy is not a possibility, like Canoerebel said. Expanding to protect your economy is probably a better approach. Along those lines, Northern Oz IMO is a must as it removes the ability of the Allies to support a drive through Timor towards Borneo and Java with land bombers. Purely on economic considerations, my vote would be for Eastern India. Madras and Calcutta (an Bombay if you were to get there) will provide a boost to HI production. You will also get some oil/refineries from the Eastern most Indian base (can't remember but think it is Ledo?). However as I say, it isn't getting you much economically in the long run (fuel you use in Indian HI will probably mean you just run out earlier later in the war).

John 3rd -> RE: Invasions (2/25/2010 3:25:36 PM)
Thank you guys. Michael and I continue to mull over the possibilities. I am certain we'll tackle NW Australia and, probably, the Perth area. Where is Mount Isa? Everything depends on the Allies. It appears, after the first couple of turns that they will FIGHT in the DEI. This is a good thing and the correct choice. We shall have to see if they can derail Michael's work at all. That one lone US Four-Stacker wreaked havoc on the Morotai Invasion Force. Rather impressive and frightening!

John 3rd -> Moving Out (2/25/2010 3:42:02 PM)
I have decided to get a little tricky in the SE. My STF, at Full Speed, would have hit Canton the evening of the 10th, however, the KB is still two days away. I order the STF (2 CA, 1 CLAA, and 5 DD) to move to a patrol line SE of Baker. The two AMC carrying an SNLF to grab Canton get the same order. The two TF will tread water for a dayso the KB can move into position NE of Canton. If there is anything AT Canton then the combined STF and KB will smash them on the 11th. If the STF and Invasion Force are spotted (worrying about Allied CVs) then they might be sacrificied to entice the American CVs into a Trap with KB coming in to close the back door. If NOTHING is present then all this scheming is for nought and there is nothing to worry about. You'll note the Baker Invasion Force in the NW corner of the Screenshot. It consists of a STF (1 CL and 3 DD) and the Invasion TF of 1 PB, 1 xAK, and 4 xAKL. Here is the planned movement for December 10th: [image]local://upfiles/18041/27A83F888046446BA656D50D1FD7B537.jpg[/image]

John 3rd -> Sightseeing (2/25/2010 3:56:19 PM)
This is a much busier location. Truk hums with activity as the Invasion Cycle really begins to click. At Truk five TF are getting ready to move out: 1. Replennishment TF of 2 AO carrying fuel for the Battlewagons. 2. Rabaul Invasion Force: CA, DD, 4 PB, AP, 5 AK, and 10 AKL carrying 4th Inf Div--C Brigade. 3. Rabaul Cover Force: 2 BB, 1 CA, and 4 DD 4. Lae Reinforcement TF: Carrying 1st Base Force 5. Rabaul Reinforcement TF: Carrying 8th Base Force The Lunga Force moves further along. It has a Cover Force of 2 CA and 1 CL protecting 6 PB and 8 AK. The Kavieng Force is about to land. It consists of a Cover Force (1 BB, 2 CA, 1 CL, and 5 DD) and 2 DD, 2 PG, 2 PB, 3 AK, 10 AKL. Lastly the Lae Invasion Force moves along with a DD, PB, 2 SC, 7 AK, and 5 AKL. The Lae Force is exposed so my Kavieng Cover TF will move over to protect it upon Landing. VERY ACTIVE! As soon as the Kavieng and Lae Forces return they will combine to load the 4th Inf Div A & B Brigades for Port Moresby. [image]local://upfiles/18041/028A7E7954BE4BADACB02AFBD0BED590.jpg[/image]

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.875