RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (Full Version)

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



Message

SqzMyLemon -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (3/28/2016 2:53:08 AM)

Also, I haven't heard from or seen Andre on the forums for some time now. Unfortunately, it seems my Allied PBEM is officially dead in the water. I'm tempted to start another, or see if I can pull a Lowpe and pick up the Allied side in an existing PBEM.



PaxMondo -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (3/28/2016 4:10:06 AM)

Employment does have a VERY positive impact upon your morale. Nice to see you in good spirits again!

[sm=00000436.gif][sm=00000436.gif][sm=00000436.gif]

[sm=00000289.gif][sm=00000289.gif][sm=00000289.gif]

[sm=00000280.gif][sm=00000280.gif][sm=00000280.gif]



Lowpe -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (3/29/2016 6:41:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Also, I haven't heard from or seen Andre on the forums for some time now. Unfortunately, it seems my Allied PBEM is officially dead in the water. I'm tempted to start another, or see if I can pull a Lowpe and pick up the Allied side in an existing PBEM.



Ask Obvert if you can pick up his game as Allies. There the KB got savaged on Dec 8th, but it is a very interesting game sometime in 1943 now.[:)]

what a pity...you had such a neat strategy, but I think you failed your personal morale check there in Oz. Oh, soo close! Well done for a very creative and threatening strategy.[&o]



SqzMyLemon -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/5/2016 2:53:12 AM)

Aircraft R&D question.

Is it worth throwing any R&D at the Ki-84b, or should you put all your effort into the Ki-84a and then upgrade to the Ki-84r?



PaxMondo -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/5/2016 3:29:31 AM)

In stock, it is one of my favorite planes. Heaviest armament, longest range Frank.

BUT, if I decide to go for it, I make that decision on day 1 and invest heavily. With a 3/45 arrival, almost 1 year later than the Frank 'a', you have to invest very heavy in RnD to make it worth getting. In your game, I doubt you have the ability to invest enough as you have already committed RnD to other models.

Further, the Frank 'b' is an offensive fighter ... it can escort Helen to max range. So it replaces the Oscar. Thus you need to ask yourself: "Am I going to be on the offensive with the Frank 'b' arrives and for how long?" Then you can decide if it is worth the investment.



SqzMyLemon -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/5/2016 4:45:47 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

In stock, it is one of my favorite planes. Heaviest armament, longest range Frank.

BUT, if I decide to go for it, I make that decision on day 1 and invest heavily. With a 3/45 arrival, almost 1 year later than the Frank 'a', you have to invest very heavy in RnD to make it worth getting. In your game, I doubt you have the ability to invest enough as you have already committed RnD to other models.

Further, the Frank 'b' is an offensive fighter ... it can escort Helen to max range. So it replaces the Oscar. Thus you need to ask yourself: "Am I going to be on the offensive with the Frank 'b' arrives and for how long?" Then you can decide if it is worth the investment.


Thanks Tony,

I hedged my bets with both models.

Ki-84a 7x30 1x55
Ki-84b 6x30

I haven't really invested much in bomber R&D so the focus is on fighters. I'd have no problem taking the supply hit to transfer even more factories to either of these fighters.

Here's the rest of my JAAF fighter R&D

Ki-61-Ia 3x30
Ki-100-I 2x30 (I misunderstood the upgrade path so could switch these to the Ki-61-Ia and take the supply hit)

Ki-43-IIa 4x30

Ki-44-IIa 4x30

Ki-83 4x30 ( I always wanted to try and get the Ki-83, but in this game I went light so these could be converted)

JNAF

A6M3 Zero 4x30

A7M2 Sam 4x30

J2M2 Jack 1x40 1x30

J7W1 Shinden 1x10 1x12 1x30 (I should convert all these to another model)

N1K1-J George 2x30 2x40

I am going hard on the Ha-43 and Ha-45 research, currently gaining 4% and 5% per day respectively. I'm not researching the Kawasaki Ha-60, Tony research is pushing straight through to Ki-100-I.

So I have at least seven R&D factories I can switch over to Frank or any other model. I'm not concerned with the supply hit to make up for any lost ground. I will have the engine bonus for both Ha-43 and Ha-45 to push things along.






FeurerKrieg -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/5/2016 5:01:57 AM)

No Ki-94 or Ki-201?! Where's the fun!

You probably made the right choice - the odds of getting the engines and planes done in time is probably not worth the usage of the R&D factories. But there's always that hope of getting the 'good' rolls on the the R&D repair really often....



GetAssista -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/5/2016 7:31:55 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon
Ki-100-I 2x30 (I misunderstood the upgrade path so could switch these to the Ki-61-Ia and take the supply hit)
...
I'm not researching the Kawasaki Ha-60, Tony research is pushing straight through to Ki-100-I.

I think the earlier you switch to Ia the better. Supply hit is negligible, both with switching and with repaired factories lost (hardly have any repaired, right?). And you need to use this remaining time to Ia arrival to make most of repairs cause you would have to switch to next model to continue as R&D factory, making repairs slower



FeurerKrieg -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/5/2016 7:59:33 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon
Ki-100-I 2x30 (I misunderstood the upgrade path so could switch these to the Ki-61-Ia and take the supply hit)
...
I'm not researching the Kawasaki Ha-60, Tony research is pushing straight through to Ki-100-I.

I think the earlier you switch to Ia the better. Supply hit is negligible, both with switching and with repaired factories lost (hardly have any repaired, right?). And you need to use this remaining time to Ia arrival to make most of repairs cause you would have to switch to next model to continue as R&D factory, making repairs slower


I agree with this. Not many repairs should have happened to the -100 factories yet, so I would switch them back to Ia to get them repaired faster.



PaxMondo -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/5/2016 2:03:53 PM)

Given where you are at in your game, I would move the Ki-84b RnD to the 'a' model. If you do, conceivably you can get the 'a' model in Q3Y43 ... that would be a big deal. Shift 6x30 to the 'r' model to get it in early '44 while you would still have ~200/month production of the 'a' model right away. Splitting RnD between the a and b models just delays when you get both. better to get one earlier. That's why I really focus. YMMV.



SqzMyLemon -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/5/2016 11:59:45 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Given where you are at in your game, I would move the Ki-84b RnD to the 'a' model. If you do, conceivably you can get the 'a' model in Q3Y43 ... that would be a big deal. Shift 6x30 to the 'r' model to get it in early '44 while you would still have ~200/month production of the 'a' model right away. Splitting RnD between the a and b models just delays when you get both. better to get one earlier. That's why I really focus. YMMV.


Yeah, in hindsight I'm not sure why I switched from the 'r' to the 'b' model in R&D. I put it down to bonehead play. I'll push hard for the 'a' as you suggest and keep a few 'r' factories in R&D.

I think I'll be fine switching things over as the arrival dates are so far in the future they wouldn't have repaired much anyway, as others have noted.

I will switch the two Ki-100-I factories over to the Ia to speed up the entire process.



Lowpe -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/6/2016 12:52:08 AM)

You have 8 Frank a factories. With engine bonus that is enough I think. You can add more to upgrade to Frank R r&d when you get closer to getting the A.

I would leave the Frank B alone....you would get at least 6 months early. How much of the factories have repaired?

I am not much of an 83 fanboy...two engines and reportedly hard to keep in the air plus very late arrival, and I don't play the altitude game.




PaxMondo -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/6/2016 4:09:19 AM)

Frank a/r depends upon what he feels are his ultimate builds. I would get however many he plans as 'r' setup now. No reason to wait until later. Most, if not all, of those factories will convert to production anyway.

Frank b - prolly not many repaired and getting it in late 44 isn't that interesting to me.

83 or 94. I feel you need one of the two. They both have huge issues, but they both are +400mph fighters. For me it is always a coin flip as to which one I choose.
Shinden on the IJN side is the easy choice.



Lowpe -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/6/2016 4:07:45 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo
83 or 94. I feel you need one of the two. They both have huge issues, but they both are +400mph fighters. For me it is always a coin flip as to which one I choose.
Shinden on the IJN side is the easy choice.



Having another 2E plane to build to me is just excessively rich, considering you have FB and Bombers that eat the 2E.

Yep the 94 ain't great, no CL guns and one 30mm set, high SR, but it is only one engine. I will take it over the slightly earlier, but expensive to make 83.

I have heard it is more difficult to keep the sr3 83 in the air flying than the sr3 Frank. Could 2E versus 1E play a part? I don't know...but might be worth looking at since they both have the same SR & durability.



Lokasenna -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/6/2016 5:05:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo
83 or 94. I feel you need one of the two. They both have huge issues, but they both are +400mph fighters. For me it is always a coin flip as to which one I choose.
Shinden on the IJN side is the easy choice.



Having another 2E plane to build to me is just excessively rich, considering you have FB and Bombers that eat the 2E.

Yep the 94 ain't great, no CL guns and one 30mm set, high SR, but it is only one engine. I will take it over the slightly earlier, but expensive to make 83.

I have heard it is more difficult to keep the sr3 83 in the air flying than the sr3 Frank. Could 2E versus 1E play a part? I don't know...but might be worth looking at since they both have the same SR & durability.


I know that number of engines factors into how planes are maintained via air support (or at least I thought it did, going way back to ~2011 or 2012 for this discussion which may have grown out of Rader/GJ and the massive raids there). If you have plenty of air support, there shouldn't be any difference.



Lowpe -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/6/2016 5:13:12 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I know that number of engines factors into how planes are maintained via air support (or at least I thought it did, going way back to ~2011 or 2012 for this discussion which may have grown out of Rader/GJ and the massive raids there). If you have plenty of air support, there shouldn't be any difference.


Thanks.[&o]

I re-read that AAR, both sides about 6 months ago. I don't remember a discussion like that, but it is in my short term memory and therefore questionable.[:)]




Lokasenna -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/6/2016 7:21:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I know that number of engines factors into how planes are maintained via air support (or at least I thought it did, going way back to ~2011 or 2012 for this discussion which may have grown out of Rader/GJ and the massive raids there). If you have plenty of air support, there shouldn't be any difference.


Thanks.[&o]

I re-read that AAR, both sides about 6 months ago. I don't remember a discussion like that, but it is in my short term memory and therefore questionable.[:)]




I think it may have come up in a thread in the general, not the AAR.



SqzMyLemon -> From out of nowhere... (4/7/2016 1:43:59 AM)

March 16/42:

Fireworks in the Indian Ocean as the first clash between rival carrier forces occurs today off the coast of Sumatra.

Allied carriers were first spotted off the Sumatran coast west of Benkoelen on 13 March 42, by Nell bombers based at Palembang. Despite weak initial intelligence, it was decided to deploy Japanese carriers based at Singapore to Medan on the 14th. No new intelligence on the position of the enemy carrier taskforce was available on the 14th, but it was again spotted west of Sinabang still on a northwest heading on the 15th. Despite continued poor intelligence on the composition of the enemy taskforce, Japanese carriers were ordered to attempt to intercept on the 16th.

Ordering a full speed run from Medan, it was intended to put Japanese carriers in a strike position east of the enemy force, providing it remained on the same northwest heading. It did. However, I wasn't prepared to encounter two Allied CV's. I thought perhaps it was me getting ambushed! There was no morning strike, but the lead was flying in the afternoon. Anyway, the AAR follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Sabang at 32,70

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 66 NM, estimated altitude 16,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 24 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 31
B5N1 Kate x 34
B5N2 Kate x 23
D3A1 Val x 25

Allied aircraft
F4F-3 Wildcat x 19

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 2 destroyed
B5N1 Kate: 1 damaged
B5N1 Kate: 1 destroyed by flak
D3A1 Val: 1 damaged
D3A1 Val: 1 destroyed by flak

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-3 Wildcat: 1 destroyed

Allied Ships
CV Enterprise
CA San Francisco, Bomb hits 1
CV Yorktown, Bomb hits 8, Torpedo hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
CL St. Louis
DD Ellet

Aircraft Attacking:
7 x D3A1 Val releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
23 x B5N2 Kate launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp
15 x B5N1 Kate launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp
8 x B5N1 Kate launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp
9 x B5N1 Kate launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp
7 x D3A1 Val releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
11 x D3A1 Val releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg SAP Bomb

CAP engaged:
VF-3 with F4F-3 Wildcat (0 airborne, 7 on standby, 2 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 3 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters between 12000 and 21000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 30 minutes
VF-42 with F4F-3 Wildcat (0 airborne, 5 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 2 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 10000 , scrambling fighters between 8000 and 15000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 6 minutes

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Sabang at 35,70

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid detected at 40 NM, estimated altitude 14,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 15 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 32

Allied aircraft
F4F-3 Wildcat x 31
SBD-3 Dauntless x 55
TBD-1 Devastator x 15

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-3 Wildcat: 7 destroyed
SBD-3 Dauntless: 2 destroyed, 8 damaged
TBD-1 Devastator: 1 destroyed

Japanese Ships
CV Kaga, Bomb hits 4, heavy fires
CVL Zuiho
CVL Shoho, Bomb hits 3, Torpedo hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
CA Chokai
CVL Ryujo, Bomb hits 1
DD Oyashio

Aircraft Attacking:
2 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
5 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
6 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 4000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
7 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 4000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
14 x TBD-1 Devastator launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22.4in Mk 13 Torp.
3 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 4000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
5 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
8 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
8 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
8 x SBD-3 Dauntless releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb

CAP engaged:
Kaga-1 with A6M2 Zero (3 airborne, 6 on standby, 0 scrambling)
3 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 14000 , scrambling fighters between 8000 and 14000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 6 minutes
Ryujo-1 with A6M2 Zero (4 airborne, 10 on standby, 0 scrambling)
4 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 14000 , scrambling fighters between 10000 and 15000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 6 minutes
Shoho-1 with A6M2 Zero (3 airborne, 6 on standby, 0 scrambling)
3 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 14000 , scrambling fighters between 10000 and 13000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 5 minutes

Heavy smoke from fires obscuring CVL Shoho
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring CV Kaga
Fuel storage explosion on CVL Shoho

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Sabang at 35,70

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid detected at 39 NM, estimated altitude 16,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 20 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 14

Allied aircraft
TBD-1 Devastator x 13

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
TBD-1 Devastator: 3 destroyed

CAP engaged:
Kaga-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
3 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 14000 , scrambling fighters between 16000 and 17000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 53 minutes
Ryujo-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
6 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 14000 , scrambling fighters between 10000 and 17000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 66 minutes
Shoho-1 with A6M2 Zero (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
5 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 14000 , scrambling fighters between 4000 and 19000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 48 minutes

On paper it looks like I took the worst of it, and considering I faced two full American CV's with 75% of my force consisting of CVL's, I consider myself extremely lucky. CVL Shoho is in rough shape thanks to the fuel storage explosion, but CV Kaga is actually in ok shape despite taking four 1000lbs bomb hits. Unfortunately, fires are still burning which prevents me from launching air operations tomorrow, not to mention brutal Japanese damage control which could still lead to the carrier sinking! With half my force out of action I have to withdraw tomorrow, and I'm not sure if I'm just facing two or possibly three American CV's. VF-3 is from CV Lexington. What I find extremely disappointing is yet again another poor showing from the torpedo bombers. Only one torpedo hit from 55 torpedo bombers has me concerned. What has happened to the deadly Japanese naval air arm of the past? The first four months has instilled zero confidence that I can achieve a decisive naval victory in the foreseeable future. However, there may be great news, or at least I hope it is and not some synch bug rearing it's ugly head. See the next post.

Here's the screenshot showing the location of the battle.

[image]local://upfiles/33192/6C874492CFD943419977FEA0DD8AA494.jpg[/image]



SqzMyLemon -> RE: From out of nowhere... (4/7/2016 1:52:05 AM)

Here's the turn end intelligence report. I don't recall hearing sinking sounds, but if this report is to be believed, it has to mean CV Yorktown sank?

[image]local://upfiles/33192/B0975839C7CD461CA520912648798D61.jpg[/image]

I've been burnt so many times in this game, that I simply don't want to trust the report. Should I? [:D]

If indeed one enemy CV is sunk, I may risk sending in Tanaka with four heavy cruisers to try a night interception of the enemy taskforce. However, I still don't know how many enemy CV's I'm facing. My carriers have to withdraw by virtue of their damage, but do I dare risk the CA's. It's going to be a tough call for me.




Lokasenna -> RE: From out of nowhere... (4/7/2016 2:12:34 AM)

On the contrary: it looks like you sank Yorktown (although she's probably not down yet, check the change in VPs for the turn) for the price of Shoho and damage to Kaga. You'll be alright.

On top of that, you have struck a psychological blow (probably). He will likely be much more cautious in future, which is good for your consolidation phase.



Lowpe -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/7/2016 3:21:41 AM)

Yorktown is gone.[:)]

I would try with the cruisers, I bet they can take a hit from one carrier and live...give them as much AA as you can.

On the other hand, if you have depleted your AA ammo, I wouldn't unless you can LRCAP them.. Also, you only do 8 hex range strikes, but you can LRCAP out to what a dozen hexes?

Retreat with the CVs, but could your risk some LRCAP from them over the Cruisers? Then I would definitely go.

Max night naval search, but I suspect they will be making flank speed away...but you only need to be lucky once.



Bif1961 -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/7/2016 2:40:45 PM)

I would try the CA TF attack. If the Yorktown is still afloat you will catch it and any escort left and sink it for sure, so say it is your insurance policy.



SqzMyLemon -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/8/2016 12:53:30 AM)

Thinking things over periodically during the day, I've decided to send in the CA's, because I may not have another shot at American CV's for some time. There is something to consider though. British CV's are most likely based at Colombo, as I've caught glimpses of them a few times northwest of Port Blair. It's conceivable that they could make a full speed run and catch my cruiser force as it pursues the American taskforce. There's also no guarantee that the American taskforce will head northwest, but rather west or southwest, meaning that I'd actually shorten the range for the British CV's. Francois knows I can't pursue with two of my carriers after the damage they've sustained, so adding the British CV's to the mix would tip the balance heavily in favour of the Allies. My cruisers could sail right into a trap. There's also another possibility, the Americans send their own surface ships to catch me at night, knowing I'm slowed with two damaged carriers, one heavily. It could be an extremely tense turn, especially if neither one of us blinks. [:D]

Just to confirm. Can CV Kaga mount flight operations with fires at 4%, or is there no chance she can provide CAP?



SqzMyLemon -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/9/2016 2:32:51 AM)

The Turn is away. Tanaka is ordered to try and intercept the carrier taskforce, or at least find and finish CV Yorktown. I almost sent in my CV's as well, but decided it was too risky. Fingers are crossed that Tanaka is successful and Japanese damage control prevents further fires to CV Kaga.

I expect the Allies to be aggressive and try to sink my two damaged carriers. Could be an interesting turn, or nothing happens at all.



SqzMyLemon -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/9/2016 6:11:56 PM)

Well, I got what I had hoped for, a night surface engagement against the American CVEnterprise taskforce, but it doesn't go as hoped on St. Patrick's Day. The luck of the Irish is with the Americans and Tanaka drops the ball. Another battle where Japanese surface forces completely underperform. Despite a night attack, tactical surprise and great Captains, the Japanese get handled roughly. Not a single long lance hit, and only 3 non-penetrating hits on the carrier just won't get it done. Nothing is coming easy to Japan in this game. AAR follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Great Nicobar at 30,68, Range 8,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
CA Mogami, Shell hits 4, on fire
CA Mikuma, Shell hits 1
CA Suzuya, Shell hits 1
CA Kumano
DD Maikaze
DD Nowaki
DD Arashi
DD Hagikaze
DD Murasame
DD Harusame
DD Yudachi, Shell hits 2, on fire

Allied Ships
CV Enterprise, Shell hits 3
CA San Francisco, Shell hits 1
CL Concord
CL St. Louis, Shell hits 2
DD Dunlap, Shell hits 1
DD Benham
DD Ellet
DD Fanning, Shell hits 2

Reduced sighting due to 0% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Clear Conditions and 0% moonlight: 11,000 yards
Range closes to 18,000 yards...
Range closes to 13,000 yards...
Range closes to 8,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 8,000 yards
Japanese open fire on surprised Allied ships at 8,000 yards
CA Suzuya launches Long Lance Torpedoes at CV Enterprise at 8,000 yards
CA Suzuya launches Long Lance Torpedoes at CA San Francisco at 8,000 yards
CA Suzuya launches Long Lance Torpedoes at CL St. Louis at 8,000 yards
CA Mogami launches Long Lance Torpedoes at CA San Francisco at 8,000 yards
DD Yudachi launches Long Lance Torpedoes at DD Fanning at 8,000 yards
DD Yudachi launches Long Lance Torpedoes at DD Benham at 8,000 yards
DD Yudachi fires at DD Dunlap at 8,000 yards
DD Maikaze launches Long Lance Torpedoes at DD Dunlap at 8,000 yards
Range closes to 3,000 yards
CA Suzuya engages CV Enterprise at 3,000 yards
CA Suzuya engages CA San Francisco at 3,000 yards
CA Mikuma engages CA San Francisco at 3,000 yards
CA Mogami engages CA San Francisco at 3,000 yards
DD Yudachi engages DD Fanning at 3,000 yards
DD Harusame engages DD Fanning at 3,000 yards
DD Benham engages DD Yudachi at 3,000 yards
DD Hagikaze engages DD Dunlap at 3,000 yards
Range increases to 5,000 yards
DD Maikaze engages CV Enterprise at 5,000 yards
CA Suzuya engages CA San Francisco at 5,000 yards
CA Mikuma engages CA San Francisco at 5,000 yards
CL Concord engages CA Mikuma at 5,000 yards
DD Dunlap engages DD Yudachi at 5,000 yards
DD Yudachi engages DD Ellet at 5,000 yards
DD Harusame engages DD Benham at 5,000 yards
DD Harusame engages DD Dunlap at 5,000 yards
DD Arashi engages DD Dunlap at 5,000 yards
Range increases to 6,000 yards
DD Maikaze engages CV Enterprise at 6,000 yards
CA Suzuya engages CA San Francisco at 6,000 yards
CA Mogami engages CL St. Louis at 6,000 yards
CA Mogami engages CL St. Louis at 6,000 yards
DD Yudachi engages DD Dunlap at 6,000 yards
DD Ellet engages DD Yudachi at 6,000 yards
DD Yudachi engages DD Benham at 6,000 yards
DD Dunlap engages DD Hagikaze at 6,000 yards
DD Arashi engages DD Fanning at 6,000 yards
Range increases to 8,000 yards
DD Yudachi engages CV Enterprise at 8,000 yards
CA Suzuya engages CA San Francisco at 8,000 yards
CL St. Louis engages CA Mikuma at 8,000 yards
CA Mikuma engages CL Concord at 8,000 yards
DD Harusame engages DD Fanning at 8,000 yards
DD Harusame engages DD Fanning at 8,000 yards
DD Murasame engages DD Benham at 8,000 yards
DD Hagikaze engages DD Ellet at 8,000 yards
Allied Task Force Manages to Escape
Task forces break off...

Here's the position of the opposing forces after day 2 of this running battle.

[image]local://upfiles/33192/05772A5181AF47409B27A3C95D7EFFF2.jpg[/image]

CV Kaga is no longer on fire. I'm going to risk my CV's once again to try and sink at least one of the American CV's. It's clear that CV Yorktown did not sink and is escorted by two destroyers. I must sink at least one of the American carriers outright. A battleship force will leave Medan and should be able to be a factor in two days. I take nothing for granted playing this game anymore and must do everything I can to get a victory here.



Lowpe -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/9/2016 6:59:54 PM)

Not too terrible, at least there was an engagement. Can you continue chasing with the Cruisers? Break down the surface task force by remaining ammunition.

I would try to move heaven and earth to nail these guys.

Good luck.



SqzMyLemon -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/9/2016 7:29:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Can you continue chasing with the Cruisers? Break down the surface task force by remaining ammunition.

I would try to move heaven and earth to nail these guys.

Good luck.


Ammunition is plentiful, it happens when your ships hardly fire a shot. [8|]

Fuel is the issue. I made a full speed run to catch CV Enterprise, not knowing which direction or how far the enemy TF's might have moved. I felt I had to. I decided 5 and 6 hexes were just too far to chance sending in the cruisers at mission speed. I opted to send in the carriers and have the cruisers rendezvous with them. This way I hope to get a naval air strike in against the wounded CV Hornet and stay out of range for a counterstrike. Then the following day I can reassess my options. The battleships have left Medan and AO's are on the way from Singapore, they just took too long to load the fuel to leave yesterday. Submarines are moving up from the south as well.

Trust me, I'm trying everything to nail this Allied combat force.



SqzMyLemon -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/9/2016 8:39:24 PM)

A note on the economy and aircraft R&D.

I seem to have turned the corner getting resources to the Home Islands. By shipping resources from Port Arthur, Keijo, Fusan and Hakodate I am meeting my requirements now and the stockpile is growing.

In aircraft R&D the Ha-45 engine advanced to 6/43. If my rough calculations are correct, this engine should go into production by 11/42, if not sooner.

I switched over aircraft R&D factories from the Ki-84b to the Ki-84r and was pleasantly surprised to see they remained intact with their current level of repair.

After a rocky economic start, I'm getting everything finally sorted out.



Lowpe -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/9/2016 8:53:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon


I switched over aircraft R&D factories from the Ki-84b to the Ki-84r and was pleasantly surprised to see they remained intact with their current level of repair.




I don't understand this move. The B comes 4 months earlier and will repair faster. The B upgrades to the R.[&:]

How many total factories were repaired already. Might have made sense to go back to the A taking the hit on supply.



SqzMyLemon -> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) (4/9/2016 9:01:16 PM)

No post



Page: <<   < prev  24 25 [26] 27 28   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
4.875