Macclan5 -> RE: A pick up game and it's not Lowpe! Sqz (A) vs. obvert (J) (4/28/2016 8:23:29 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon Kudos to Historiker. The American Navy is in excellent shape. The British have been somewhat roughed up with the battleship losses. My perception of the overall number of battleships lost was more dire than the reality would indicate. Considering three old U.S. battleships appear to have been lost near Wake Island recently, the total is actually quite low. Here are the major Allied vessels lost as of 31 Oct 43: 1 CV, 1 CVE, 12 BB, 4 CA, 14 CL, 35 DD and 41 SS. Japanese losses as of 31 Oct 43: 4 CV, 2 CVL, 2 BB, 7 CA, 7 CL, 31 DD and 26 SS. Still a potent IJN out there. Wow given the "relatively early date" I am surprised not many commented. -- By the way thank you SQ - very obliging! I mean I and a dozen others ask you about small stuff like list your entire OOB, Naval disposition, theater by theater analysis, and ohh throw in grand strategic plans in one post [8D] What excites me about this particular AAR is that it starts in "the beef" - right when both sides are very balanced and the right moves make huge differences. << PS did you two agree to play to an "end date" or VP total ??>> -- On Naval Losses. My impression is that the CA CL DD losses are especially in your favor. Sure the IJN is formidable but my impression is the loss of CA CL and DD hurts the IJN far more than allied navies. Not simply because the Allies will get more but because the Japanese ships are so very versatile in (1) loading troops (2) as ASW platforms which the IJN is impoverished (3) and CV / BB screens. I base that on limited game experience but I think I am correct in that assessment. I cant imagine the IJN - formidable as remaining pieces are - can venture beyond land based air screen in support because they must be hurting in CL and DD screens. You should over time be able to identify where they "will not attack" from" unless Mr Lowpe Esq takes a risky flier in 1944 to interrupt an invasion. I wouldn't know if he follows IJN doctrine looking for that but....
|
|
|
|