RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> After Action Report



Message


ashkpa -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 2:39:02 AM)

ND40 i1: Next up is the North Atlantic. The German sub in the 3-box did find and engage the 0-box only on rolls of 4/5.

Based on your decision on the E. Coast, I'm assuming the convoys will stay for rnd 2.

[image]local://upfiles/47448/92F0449E66E845329898B604071636A9.jpg[/image]




rkr1958 -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 2:46:49 AM)

Yes. Same basing priority for aborting CPs.




ashkpa -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 2:51:04 AM)

ND40 i1: N. Atln rnd 2. Searches of 4/10 resulted in the axis 3-box engaging the 0-box and clearing the convoys (X 2A). The axis subs will not be committed in rnd 3 ending the combat.
Aborted CPs will again go to Gibraltar so as to avoid potential combat in the Bay of Biscay.

[image]local://upfiles/47448/B09303C694D247D2998D2C8FFCB10084.jpg[/image]




ashkpa -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 2:53:06 AM)

Sorry, the CPs made it to Plymouth by going around the isles and approaching Liverpool from the North Sea.
edit - initially indicated Liverpool, corrected to Plymouth.




ashkpa -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 3:06:16 AM)

ND40 i1: BoB rnd 1, search numbers of 2/9 results in IT sub engaging the 0-box with 9 surprise points.
Use 4 sp to choose submarine combat
use 2 sp to reduce ASW by 1 column
use 2 sp to increase sub damage by 1 column


[image]local://upfiles/47448/811E0E31084C436BA7F3555772FB49D1.jpg[/image]




rkr1958 -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 3:10:50 AM)

The RN stays the course in the Bay of Biscay. Ready for round 2.




ashkpa -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 3:10:55 AM)

ND40 i1: Bob rnd 2. Searches were 3/3 resulted in a surface combat. No effect on the alles. The sub took a damage.

[image]local://upfiles/47448/FAA0418431DA430F89528F6BB30EC2F7.jpg[/image]




ashkpa -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 3:14:18 AM)

ND40 i1: Round 3, both searches found on 2's. Net is the sub takes another damage and is destroyed.

[image]local://upfiles/47448/8582DB0A684445AA93BE8BF9EBFF8681.jpg[/image]




rkr1958 -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 3:16:48 AM)

By the way, is it too late for me to change my mind about letting you go first this turn? [:D] [:D] [:D]

7 CW CPs sunk and 8 aborted. [:(]




ashkpa -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 3:34:01 AM)

ND40 i1: GS
France, the FR can respond to the GS on Rouen or Paris with the fighter. Also ground striking Chungking with ART and two bombers.

[image]local://upfiles/47448/3111F760EA3D421494F199BD0612F780.jpg[/image]




ashkpa -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 3:36:29 AM)

quote:

By the way, is it too late for me to change my mind about letting you go first this turn?

7 CW CPs sunk and 8 aborted.


No way!!![;)]. I have been very lucky recently in the sea zones (starting last impulse in the W. Med).[&o]




rkr1958 -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 3:46:20 AM)

Potez stays on the ground.




ashkpa -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 3:52:30 AM)

ND40 i1: Ground strike results (I'm happy[:)], but I doubt you are [:(])


[image]local://upfiles/47448/E159A619C87D47DFB1B8F5A0BCE9BAC6.jpg[/image]




rkr1958 -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 4:01:32 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ashkpa
ND40 i1: Ground strike results (I'm happy[:)], but I doubt you are [:(])



[image]local://upfiles/31901/22BA6B0E3F6D411EA3D4E6E262BE9265.jpg[/image]




ashkpa -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 5:14:08 AM)

Attack Results: Chungking fall, Paris repulses another attack.

{I did check over the weekend, my rolls are approximately statistically correct overall, it just seems that the poor rolls are consistently happening in France.}
I think I would have preferred missing all of the sub battles for one higher die roll on the Paris attack.

[image]local://upfiles/47448/11AD4795EC1848BC99B0AA6934E8FF95.jpg[/image]




ashkpa -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 5:15:17 AM)

Now Jean Luc can put on his happy face.




ashkpa -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 5:16:02 AM)

Oh, yes, which unit do you want to survive in Paris?




rkr1958 -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 5:17:19 AM)

5-3 infantry.




rkr1958 -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 5:21:28 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ashkpa

Now Jean Luc can put on his happy face.

I'm not sure he's ready for his happy face. There's a lot to mull over. [:)]

[image]local://upfiles/31901/73570B68E12348DFA77CD092A8449795.jpg[/image]




rkr1958 -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 5:22:36 AM)

By the way, could the USA be any less interested in what's going on in China?!




ashkpa -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 5:31:56 AM)

ND40 i1: Two GE HQ's reorganized the main portions of the Paris assault forces.

Europe situation

[image]local://upfiles/47448/4486A45F5BD14658B6417D2E120C2F3B.jpg[/image]




ashkpa -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 5:33:05 AM)

ND40 i1: China Situation.
Chungking is down. Now how long will it take to move those forces north. A long time in the winter, I suspect.

[image]local://upfiles/47448/93B024C38C7D408B8A07096BA1168057.jpg[/image]




Centuur -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 9:31:02 AM)

I believe that it was a mistake not to groundstrike the stack adjacent to Paris with the Luftwaffe.

Consider this: if the stack adjacent to Paris gets disorganised, no reinforcements can reach the city anymore. Also, that stack in itself can be attacked out of three hexes (not adjacent to Paris). So if that ground strike is good enough, Germany could have blitzed that stack in the open and get rid of any possible reinforcements for Paris, too.

One should always consider the possibility of failure and act accordingly in MWIF. Yes, I know: +15 is a good attack on Paris and chances that things will go wrong are not high. But the possibility of failure is there and one should try to minimize the consequences of valiant French defenders, who decide to fight to the last bullet...

Now, Germany is again faced with a fully stacked Paris and has to start over again.




ashkpa -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/25/2016 2:52:40 PM)

quote:

I believe that it was a mistake not to groundstrike the stack adjacent to Paris with the Luftwaffe.

Consider this: if the stack adjacent to Paris gets disorganised, no reinforcements can reach the city anymore. Also, that stack in itself can be attacked out of three hexes (not adjacent to Paris). So if that ground strike is good enough, Germany could have blitzed that stack in the open and get rid of any possible reinforcements for Paris, too.

One should always consider the possibility of failure and act accordingly in MWIF. Yes, I know: +15 is a good attack on Paris and chances that things will go wrong are not high. But the possibility of failure is there and one should try to minimize the consequences of valiant French defenders, who decide to fight to the last bullet...

Now, Germany is again faced with a fully stacked Paris and has to start over again.

Certainly a mistake in hindsight. At the time I was wanting to keep some FR forces alive so that they could convert to Vichy. Maybe silly, but that was my line of thought. I prioritized the Rouen (wanted to disorganize the plane) and Paris GS (that worked). Also, I was not expecting to roll a 4 after rolling a 5 in the previous attack on Paris. With the fractional, the chance of missing taking Paris was only 4.5% (less than 1 in 20).

I have been kicking my self for not adding another fighter-bomber to the attack. 2 more points of GS would have made the fractional, which would have given me Paris. There are so many what-ifs.




rkr1958 -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/26/2016 3:03:46 AM)

Turn 8. Nov/Dec 1940. Allied #2. Actions.

[image]local://upfiles/31901/0D9917E790344710A0005AAFC716175B.jpg[/image]




rkr1958 -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/26/2016 3:08:13 AM)

Turn 8. Nov/Dec 1940. Allied #2. RN. West Med & North Atlantic.

The RN declines to attempt to initiate combat in two sea areas that the axis (specifically the Italians) can.

1. Do the Italians wish to try to initiate a naval combat in the Western Med? If so, do they wish to add the German NAV, which can be added to sea box 2 and below? The RAF has three planes that they can add. The max sea boxes to which they could be added is shown.

2. Do the Italians wish to try to initiate a naval combat in the North Atlantic?

[image]local://upfiles/31901/AD1A7194051D4661A593931F19647F2A.jpg[/image]




ashkpa -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/26/2016 3:24:25 AM)

quote:

1. Do the Italians wish to try to initiate a naval combat in the Western Med? If so, do they wish to add the German NAV, which can be added to sea box 2 and below? The RAF has three planes that they can add. The max sea boxes to which they could be added is shown.

2. Do the Italians wish to try to initiate a naval combat in the North Atlantic?

Yes.
1) I will initiate in the W. Med. The GE NAV and the IT fighter under it will both react out to the 1-box, joining their comrades.

2) I will initiate in the N. Atlantic as well (both should now be disorganized). If I get the chance with enough surprise points, I may go after the carrier Illustrious since it is alone in the 3-box (it would be surface).




rkr1958 -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/26/2016 3:52:41 AM)

Turn 8. Nov-Dec 1940. Allied #2. Axis, West Med.

Both searches fail, no combat.

[image]local://upfiles/31901/D8C88E6556454F7DBEB686FDA9644312.jpg[/image]




rkr1958 -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/26/2016 3:55:20 AM)

Turn 8. Nov-Dec 1940. Allied #2. Axis, North Atlantic.

In the North Atlantic, the Italians subs continue to find and surprise the RN! However, they are 1 surprise point short of being able to isolate and force a surface combat against the RN aircraft carrier Illustrious in the 3-box.

How would you like to use your surprise points? Avoid combat or isolate sea box 0, use 4 surprise points to force a submarine combat and then what?

[image]local://upfiles/31901/45C7C8BD34A742AEA4427DCC5DB2CEB7.jpg[/image]




ashkpa -> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR (8/26/2016 4:09:55 AM)

I believe I believe I would have 6 surprise points versus just the 0-box.
If so spend 4 to select submarine combat and the last 2sp to reduce the ASW (which should be 10 factors I believe).
If I have 8 surprise points or more let me know.




Page: <<   < prev  26 27 [28] 29 30   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.75