RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (Full Version)

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



Message

SqzMyLemon -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/8/2011 5:52:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

We are playing with PDU off, so that may affect how many squadrons he can upgrade to the Tojo.  I don't think we'll see the flood witnessed in games with PDU on.  However, I have a poor understanding of research and upgrades, so I could be wrong.


Hi Canoerebel,

You can expect to see a grand total of 90 Ki-44-IIa Tojo's in units of 42, 36 and 12 aircraft respectively with PDU off in 1942. The rest are Nates, Zero's or Oscar 1c's. A number of Sentai's with obsolete aircraft will also upgrade when the Ki-44-IIb comes online in 1943.

I may be wrong with the numbers, I keep forgetting this is Scenario 2. I have no idea how many Sentai's are able to convert under this scenario. I do know that the Ki-44-IIa is available in June as opposed to August in this case. So lets be safe and say you may face a minimum of 90 Tojo's [;)].



Paladin1dcs -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/8/2011 7:24:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

You have missed my point. There are too many Japanese units who are way beyond reach of Allied strikes.

Alfred

I understand that there are too many training units beyond his immediate reach, but the purpose for my question was to inquire into how the game dealt with strafing attacks upon grounded fighters. I was unsure if strafing their airfields would result in pilot losses as well as material losses or if it resulted in only material losses.




Canoerebel -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/8/2011 7:29:35 PM)

No, strafing doesn't affect your pilot pools.

The only way to kill pilots is in aerial combat.  (Note, though, that not all pilots are killed when their aircraft are shot down.  Some become POWs.  And sometimes the pilot parachutes to safety - quite often this happens when the fighting is over a friendly base).



Canoerebel -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/8/2011 8:27:08 PM)

I've just been corrected by PM that pilots can die on the ground also.  However, the message, which came from one who wishes to remain anonymous, didn't tell me how they die.  Perhaps this means that they can die when their planes are destroyed on the ground (by strafing or bombing attacks).  Or perhaps random dice rolls can result in disease, psychological disorders, getting lost in the jungle while relieving themselves, or a crazed banzai attack like occurred at the Iwo Jima airfield in 1945.

I would delve more into this, but to be honest I am not a big fan of the pilot-training routine.  Adding management of how they can die apart from aerial combat is duty beyond my pay grade.



Cribtop -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/8/2011 9:27:58 PM)

Yes, I've seen pilots destroyed on the ground when their planes are hit on the ground. However, the initial point, that Japan has oodles of training groups in Manchuria and the Home Islands out of the reach of the Allies, is still valid.



MaB1708 -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/8/2011 11:02:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel


I would very much like Nemo to feel welcome here and to continue with his insightful AARs.


+1

Cheers,

Martin



Paladin1dcs -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/9/2011 12:14:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cribtop

Yes, I've seen pilots destroyed on the ground when their planes are hit on the ground. However, the initial point, that Japan has oodles of training groups in Manchuria and the Home Islands out of the reach of the Allies, is still valid.

I agree that the initial point about the IJ training units makes this idea as a whole a moot point, but the very fact that it's such a rare event for pilots to be killed on the ground that many here have never seen it happen just reinforces my initial suspicion that it's inconsequential to pilot experience levels anyway.






Canoerebel -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/9/2011 1:22:15 AM)

An anonymous but bright poster PM'ed that the Japanese attack on the American airfield at Iwo Jima was not a crazed banzaii attack at all, but rather a well-thought out and disciplined infiltration mission.  I actually knew that, but in my haste to sound whitty and rakish I permitted error to slip into my narrative.  I thank the anonymous benefactor for straightening me out.

Query:  The Japanese defense of Iwo Jima (and also Pelelieu and Okinawa) was very different from Tarawa.  Was this purely on the initiative of the local commanders, so that the successes of these defenses wouldn't necessarily have been carried over to the defense of Japan, or (1) had the strategy come from the High Command in Japan, or if not (2) would word have gotten back to Japan so that the strategy might have been perpetrated? 

That's a long way of asking:  Would the Allies have faced Iwo Jim/Okinawa in Japan, or would they have faced Tarawa?



Cribtop -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/9/2011 2:19:01 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Paladin1dcs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cribtop

Yes, I've seen pilots destroyed on the ground when their planes are hit on the ground. However, the initial point, that Japan has oodles of training groups in Manchuria and the Home Islands out of the reach of the Allies, is still valid.

I agree that the initial point about the IJ training units makes this idea as a whole a moot point, but the very fact that it's such a rare event for pilots to be killed on the ground that many here have never seen it happen just reinforces my initial suspicion that it's inconsequential to pilot experience levels anyway.



I concur. It's theoretically possible, but not at all probable.



paullus99 -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/9/2011 2:19:10 AM)

Actually, besides perhaps a rough fight on the beaches that may have been closer to Tarawa, I would say the fighting would be more like what occurred in the Phillipines - lots of terrain and frontage, but with lots of allied firepower deployed to attempt to limit the number of allied casaulties.



Cribtop -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/9/2011 2:21:10 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

An anonymous but bright poster PM'ed that the Japanese attack on the American airfield at Iwo Jima was not a crazed banzaii attack at all, but rather a well-thought out and disciplined infiltration mission.  I actually knew that, but in my haste to sound whitty and rakish I permitted error to slip into my narrative.  I thank the anonymous benefactor for straightening me out.

Query:  The Japanese defense of Iwo Jima (and also Pelelieu and Okinawa) was very different from Tarawa.  Was this purely on the initiative of the local commanders, so that the successes of these defenses wouldn't necessarily have been carried over to the defense of Japan, or (1) had the strategy come from the High Command in Japan, or if not (2) would word have gotten back to Japan so that the strategy might have been perpetrated? 

That's a long way of asking:  Would the Allies have faced Iwo Jim/Okinawa in Japan, or would they have faced Tarawa?


Damn good question. I think Iwo was generally the good choices of the local commander. However, I think when you look at the evolution of Japanese defenses throughout the war they gravitated more and more to the "cave/bunker" strategy. It may be convergent evolution, it may be a plan, but my guess is we would have faced Iwo on steroids where the terrain permitted.



Kapitanma -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/9/2011 4:13:02 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

An anonymous but bright poster PM'ed that the Japanese attack on the American airfield at Iwo Jima was not a crazed banzaii attack at all, but rather a well-thought out and disciplined infiltration mission.  I actually knew that, but in my haste to sound whitty and rakish I permitted error to slip into my narrative.  I thank the anonymous benefactor for straightening me out.

Query:  The Japanese defense of Iwo Jima (and also Pelelieu and Okinawa) was very different from Tarawa.  Was this purely on the initiative of the local commanders, so that the successes of these defenses wouldn't necessarily have been carried over to the defense of Japan, or (1) had the strategy come from the High Command in Japan, or if not (2) would word have gotten back to Japan so that the strategy might have been perpetrated? 

That's a long way of asking:  Would the Allies have faced Iwo Jima/Okinawa in Japan, or would they have faced Tarawa?


The success of the Japanese defenses on both Okinawa, and Iwo Jima were largely the works of their respective local commanders. Ushijima/Yahara and Kuribayashi were all very "Westernized" and this showed in both their treatment of their commands and the results achieved.

The problem is that small unit tactics weren't passed on due to the annihilation of Japanese garrisons. This is actually one of the reasons Ushijima forbade Yahara from committing harakiri when the fall of Okinawa became imminent; someone needed to return to Japan with the knowledge and experience gained during the defense of Okinawa. On a more broad level, it was apparent to the Imperial HQ that the heavily defensive strategies adopted worked well and that was the path the Home Islands defenses were taking.

We would have faced another Okinawa, except against more numerous, more heavily prepared, and better supplied fortications.



Barb -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/9/2011 6:56:07 AM)

Shift from "beach defense" to the "defense in depth" is apparent all the way from Tarawa to Iwo Jima /Okinaw. Japanese realized that they cannot face allied naval and air supperiority on the beaches - their positions would be destroyed or incapacitated before the troops got ashore and overrun quickly (Tarawa was example of allied preparation fire lifted too soon and not being throughout).

So they went with defense in depth which had the effect of considerably slowing the enemy giving home islands more time to prepare for defense. I would say that in operation Downfall Japanese would try to delay allies on Kyushu as much as possible. But probably there would also be some BIG counteroffensive to break throug allied lines. However this would be very costly.

On the Kanto plain, the Japanese wouldnt have the posibilities, so they would probably be overran.



JeffroK -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/9/2011 9:00:48 AM)

Osprey has "Japanese Pacific island Defenses 1941-45" by Gordon L Rottman.

He doesnt get as far as describing Home Island defenses, concentrates more on the years 1943-44.

Well worth the read, though maybe not worth the buy.



Erkki -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/9/2011 10:38:31 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I've just been corrected by PM that pilots can die on the ground also.  However, the message, which came from one who wishes to remain anonymous, didn't tell me how they die.  Perhaps this means that they can die when their planes are destroyed on the ground (by strafing or bombing attacks).  Or perhaps random dice rolls can result in disease, psychological disorders, getting lost in the jungle while relieving themselves, or a crazed banzai attack like occurred at the Iwo Jima airfield in 1945.

I would delve more into this, but to be honest I am not a big fan of the pilot-training routine.  Adding management of how they can die apart from aerial combat is duty beyond my pay grade.


Yes. My worst day was when 16 B-17s flew on what I thought was my combined AAA and CAP trap with 60 heavy guns, 50 Zeroes and 10 Ki-45s. I lost 5 planes in the air(1 pilot WIA) and 5 Zeroes on the ground(3 KIA 2 WIA) for 0 kills. 1 of those KIA pilots was Sakai, 2 others were also 5 and 6 kill aces and the 2 wounded were complete greentags from a "Netty escort squadron". [:@]

However I dont think the game mechanics are as in BTR where every each non-damaged non-repairing plane on the ground, including night fighters in daytime phase and day fighters in nighttime phase, are manned. Losing pilots in the ground seems to be rare so I think the game actually does track pilots who are in the CAP/LRCAP cycle and actually in cockpit, but failed to take off for any reason, before the raid reached the base.

However I dont think those lost pilots are reported in the intel screen, but the player has to keep track of the pilots himself or look for "ACE WIA/KIA" entries in the WitPTracker's Alert section. If the pilot wasnt an ace or a leader I dont think theres a way to know you lost someone other than checking the under action air units each turn.



Canoerebel -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/9/2011 2:15:34 PM)

6/11/42
 
DEI:  B-17s from Oosthaven sortied against enemy shipping at Balikpan, scoring hits on 25 xAK, two xAP, two DMS, and one APD.  Japan has abundant shipping, but this strike is enough to cause some angst (aren't successful port strikes against any player's ships always a bit vexxing?).  The air transport convoy delivered the Kittyhawk and Warhawk squadrons to Oosthaven (that's important).

Bay of Bengal:  KB remains at Georgetown.

Burma:  Japan takes Pegu.  Unless Japan reinforces considerably, the Allies will wage a campaign for western Burma, trying to blunt and counter any enemy moves that way.  Steve will have to reinforce to recapture what was his just a few weeks ago.

China:  The Japanese are beginning to move out of Chengchow now.  Odds are favorable that the enemy is about to make a mistake by dividing forces, thus inviting defeat in detail.

NoPac:  That enemy TF was one or two APDs bringing supply to isolated Amchitka. The TF anchored by BB Pennsylvania and CL Trenton will depart Kodiak for Dutch Harbor tonight.

CenPac:  I have to make a quick decision about the RCT 100% prepped for Ocean Island.  I may land half the troops at Tarawa and send the other half part way to Mili while engaging is some quick recon flights tomorrow to see if that base is vacant.

SoPac:  Most of 19th RCT is ashore at Pago Pago, increasing the AV to roughly 480.  This base should be secure until Japan brings reinforcements, which is what the Allies want here in "Little Vietnam."  A squadron of Buffaloes flew in from Canton Island - the first fighters to this base.  I hope some Bettys will bite the dust tomorrow.

Mini-KB:  I lost track of the Mini-KB last sighted yesterday near Zamboanga.  My strong suspicion is that it is bound for CenPac and Tarawa.  Little Vietnam # 2.



House Stark -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/9/2011 3:14:34 PM)

Can you naval bomb Georgetown with your B-17s? While that's a far more dangerous target than Balikpapan, a couple bomb hits on CVs could cause him more delays in that he would have to repair them before moving on Sumatra, or else use a significantly reduced carrier force. He evidently thinks that his carriers are safe there, maybe you should challenge that perception if possible.

As for his Mini-KB, maybe he figures that he can cut off and then take Pago Pago with CV support due to all the Allied CVs being near Sumatra. That might be further evidence that he might not be really concentrating for the assault on Sumatra just yet.



paullus99 -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/9/2011 3:34:46 PM)

That's going to hurt - just from the standpoint of having to reorganize his shipping & bring in fresh vessels to take the place of the damaged ones.



zuluhour -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/10/2011 8:18:40 PM)

noob question. RCT?
reg. combat team?



witpqs -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/10/2011 8:25:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: zuluhour

noob question. RCT?
reg. combat team?


Yes.



Canoerebel -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/10/2011 8:48:21 PM)

6/12/42
 
DEI:  The KB has disappeared from view, probably somewhere in the Makassar Straits. 21st IJA Div. is at Tandjoesomething, across the island from the Allied base at Sibolga.  I'm thinking this may indicate at least some kind of land campaign in eastern Sumatra - at least against Sibolga and then Padang.  If it ties up good divisions for a long time, fine.  The Allied carriers are back on station west of Cocos Island.  Air squadrons are almost all at full strength, but both Ent and York are showing signs of needing time in the yards.  I'll keep them in place for a few days, then probably strip their aircraft, send the places to Sumatra, and let the carriers retire to Colombo to repair.

Burma:  Quiet as Japan undoubedly prepares to move on the Allied positions to the west.

China:  AVG Squadron 2 ambushed a bunch of Lilys and Anns at Psiangtiang, downing 30.

CenPac:  PBYs will recon Mili tomorrow, as a battalion on transports heads that way.  If the island looks vacant, the Allies will land the day after tomorrow.  If not, the troops will retire to Tarawa, where they'll join the rest of this RCT.

SoPac:  An enemy combat TF (probably Hiei and friends) should arrive here tonight.  The Allied ships will depart first, with most of 19th RCT ashore now.  The Allies have 510 AV behind four forts, so Japan will have to reinforce to make any headway.



Canoerebel -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/11/2011 3:27:59 PM)

Here's a map of eastern Sumatra on June 13, 1942. The plan:

1. Defense anchored around Palembang, Oosthaven, and Benkolen.
2. CD units are concentrated at Oosthaven since it is the best target for Japan and lacks the defensive bonuses found at the other two hexes.
3. Small reserves located at Prabaemolith and Lahat (300 AV total) can move to any of these bases on short notice.
4. In the event Japan moves over land from western Sumatra, the Allies will employ 4EB to slow it down.
5. The Allies currently have about 600 land-based fighters - this will fluctuate +/- 100 due to scheduled withdrawals and reinforcements en route.
6. Allied carriers stationed nearby can contribute their squadrons to the fight or can attack if there is an opportunity.
7. Allied combat TFs posted nearby meant to disrupt any attempted landings.
8. Cocos Island has 100 AV behind three forts, serving as an outpost protecting the eastern (true map) flank.
9. The Allies are prepping additional land units to commit to eastern Sumatra as political points become availalbe (200+ PP spent yesterday to buy a good Aussie CD unit now on the way to Benkolen). The Allies believed that Japan would be in a position to unilaterally take control of the situation - to isolate and eventually neutralize Sumatra - from the start of the war through late summer. As the summer wears on, however, the Allies begin to grow strong enough to contest the issue, so that Japan will no longer retain unilateral power. That time is now drawing close enough to warrant preparation to reinforce.
10. It is possible that the "bristling Allied defense" of eastern Sumatra has resulted in the enemy's reluctance to accept the challenge...so that the enemy is easily diverted by what seem to be important but more manageable challenges elsewhere. If Japan has truly detached a Mini KB to the Gilberts area, that would be a good example...and a good development for the Allies.

[image]local://upfiles/8143/6C6B8B5677A2407397AF650DDEB2F69F.jpg[/image]



Canoerebel -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/11/2011 4:22:00 PM)

6/13/42
 
DEI:  Once again, patrols report the KB at Georgetown (it was probably there yesterday, too). 

Burma:  The Japanese are advancing in force up the road from Pegu, beleived to include 33rd Div.  The Allies will probably make a stand at Toungoo with about 300 AV, including 27th US Div., relying on the wooded hex to benefit the defense.  The Allies will still have three good Brit and American units to guard against a flanking move.  The airfield at Chittagong is up to level four, which will help the Allies employ B-26 and B-25 bombers in this campaign.

SoPac:  The enemy TF apparently didn't visit Pago Pago, nor was it sighted today.

CenPac:  I-175 scores two more hits, sinking an xAP and badly damaging an xAK at Tarawa.  A small enemy unit reported at Mili is probably strong enough to thwart a snap invasion by an unprepped battalion. The Allies are mulling over the decision to use the Warspite TF to bombard, or to instead scrub the entire thing.

NoPac:  BB Pennsylvania TF to bombard Amchitka.  This will alert Steve that capital ships are in the area again.  He will counter, and eventually the Allies might spring an ambush with Wasp.

Edited because GreyJoy spelling rubbed off on me.



Cribtop -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/11/2011 5:36:02 PM)

I would scrub Mili if the enemy is infantry, such as an SNLF or even an SNLF company. However, you might bombard anyway just to put another scare into Steve. Then if you find out the enemy unit is not a combat force, you could make an informed choice about the invasion.



madflava13 -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/11/2011 5:43:40 PM)

Scrub the Mili invasion. No need to stick your neck out that far at this point. Consolidate your gains, fortify, move forward.



Insano -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/11/2011 6:53:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cribtop

I would scrub Mili if the enemy is infantry, such as an SNLF or even an SNLF company. However, you might bombard anyway just to put another scare into Steve. Then if you find out the enemy unit is not a combat force, you could make an informed choice about the invasion.


Hi not sure this bombardment is such a good idea. Remember the static Mili Naval Fortress. The prewar Japanese coastal defenses in this area have a reputation for roughing up any ships that come near up to and including BBs. I looked it up in Tracker to put it in perspective and it is approximately equivalent to bombarding 2 Japanese light cruisers which cannot be sunk (without torpedoes of course). And we're not talking the crappy prewar CLs. I mean the better new CLs.

There is some value to make a harassing bombardment to "put him on notice" but be warned it is almost certain that you will take damage and cause no lasting damage in return.



Canoerebel -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/11/2011 7:06:27 PM)

Helpful input from you guys, so I went back to re-evaluate the situation.  First thing I noticed was a Japanese combat TF of undertermine size and composition approaching the Gilberts from the Solomons.  This TF is at least two days away (I think), and I don't think it can be the Mini KB yet, but if Steve is sending something into a theater where he knows the Allies have airfields and a battleship TF, it must be signficant.  So I'm withdrawing most of my ships, especially the Warspite TF.

Also, I agree that Mili is just a bit too far "out there" to effectively defend.  So, I've turned that TF around to instead land a battalion at the dot hex of Makin, which can be built large.  This gives the Allies a perimeter of occupied bases (Nauru, Ocean and Makin, with Tabituea and Abemama to follow eventually).  Tarawa has a garrison of 350 AV with two forts and 32k supply, so it would be very hard for Japan to try to land there.  Also, lots of Sea Bee units are enroute to these islands from San Diego (currently most are just east of Hawaii).



Cribtop -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/11/2011 7:15:38 PM)

Insano is correct. Just checked the fortress and it's not worth a harassment attack.



CaptBeefheart -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/12/2011 6:59:26 AM)

A long time ago I had an invasion really roughed up at Mili by those CDs and ended up withdrawing. That said, some of those big CD islands are perfect to take by paras if he doesn't have much or any infantry. Eben Emael, anyone?

Cheers,
CC



Canoerebel -> RE: Das darf nicht var sein! (8/12/2011 11:42:44 AM)

6/14/42
 
DEI:  I just confirmed that I can unload air-transport cargo at Cocos Island, a level one port/two airfield.  This will reduce the risk of the runs into Oosthaven and also speed up delivery.  Since six more squadrons (five fighter, one F-4 Recon) are inbound, this is helpful.  SiInt reports a second IJA division in western Sumatra - 52 at Medan (plus 21 at Tandjoesomething).  Almost certain the Japanese will engage in a major cross-island offensive, at least to move on Padang.

Bay of Bengal:  KB still at Georgetown.

SoPac:  Tone and Mikuma show up at Pago Pago and don't accomplish anything.  Hiei seems to have retired to repair damage.

CenPac:  Netties sink an xAK and damage two xAP at Makin.  US Army battalion safely landed at Makin.  Japanese TF of unknown type, but including at least one DD, just south of Nauru Island.  Most Allied shipping is now well to the east or northeast.  I'm interested in seeing what this might be.



Page: <<   < prev  45 46 [47] 48 49   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.0625