RE: Notes from a Small Island

RE: Notes from a Small Island (Full Version)

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

Message

tarkalak -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/23/2018 10:28:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Canoerebel Looks like I am playing the up-to-date version. ... Isn't the Japanese side's combat resolution that matters in PBM? May be you should ask Obvert for what version he is using. Disclamer: I haven't played a single PBM, but from the forum I get that the the Allied combat resolution is only for potential synch bugs and doesn't matter in the real state of the game.

modrow -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/23/2018 1:16:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lokasenna The 10-hex distance leading to a reaction is very odd to me, but I'll take your word on it. I'm also pretty sure that the hexes quotes as the reaction range in the manual are old WITP hex ranges. First, a disclaimer: I did not follow any modifications in betas and refer to the original manual below, so this may be off. I appreciate any correction of my statement if it is incorrect. But I always believed there are different reaction routines at work. The AM/PM reaction corresponds to what is described in section 6.3.4 of the manual (special CV movement), eventually involving modifications and with the (to me open) question whether the override by aggressive commander is a die roll vs aggressiveness or involves also a threshold value. But there is also the reaction triggered in resolution of night phase and day phase, which refers to sections 8.7 (for night and day phase) and 6.2.5. (for day phase only).I always thought (which may be wrong) that the header means (coastwacher check) and (trigger reactions) not coastwatcher (check and trigger reactions), meaning that also if no coastwatchers are present a reaction may be triggered in this phase, but I may be wrong here. If this assumption is correct, 10 hex reaction may be induced during night phase processing and, at least if it occurs according to 6.2.5, should be suppressed if following another TF as per 6.2.5. Conversely, reaction after air search in AM/PM phase is controlled by another routine and likelihood reduced by less aggressive TF commander, but maybe not ruled out. Hartwig (edited for precision of statement)

crsutton -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/23/2018 6:57:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lokasenna quote: ORIGINAL: Canoerebel This game must be using an old EXE, because my carriers reacted three or four hexes in the previous carrier battle. (I'm computer illiterate, so I don't actually know how to check, but I do know the reaction covered multiple hexes.) Limiting reaction to just one hex is a most outstanding modification. I look forward to playing an up-to-date game one of these days. It'll be nice not to have to worry about carriers suddenly steaming 200 miles in the wrong direction, against orders, leaving critical combat ships and amphibious TFs unguarded and much-needed CVEs out of position. Like most players, I hate the old reaction modeling. If you were running this game version when the multiple hex reaction happened, I want to see it... I'm pretty certain Michael put a hard stop on limiting the special CV reactions to 1 hex per TF. As mentioned, I still think reactions only occur at 5-6 hexes (maybe 4 but I don't think so). I've never had them occur at 7 hexes (as either side). Again, I think this is an artifact of legacy coding from WITP with more miles per hex. My multiple reactions occurred because the first reaction put the CV TF within reaction range of a second detected enemy CV TF (I slowed it down and watched the messages individually IIRC; it's been a while. I did put it all on YouTube). I want to note also that that was the only time I ever had the much-maligned reactions occur (and it worked out for me, really). My advice on that is simply to do what I always did: don't be coy about CV battles. You're either all-in, ensuring it happens, or all-out. Never be a 'tweener. Shows you where my head is at. I was moaning over a recent reaction yet checked and my version dates back to 2014. I suggested to my opponent that we patch up to the latest version.....[8\|]

Lokasenna -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/23/2018 7:03:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hartwig.modrow If this assumption is correct, 10 hex reaction may be induced during night phase processing and, at least if it occurs according to 6.2.5, should be suppressed if following another TF as per 6.2.5. Conversely, reaction after air search in AM/PM phase is controlled by another routine and likelihood reduced by less aggressive TF commander, but maybe not ruled out. Hartwig (edited for precision of statement) This would normally be possible, however CV TFs do not (to my knowledge) use the reaction "spinner" that is in the lower right of the TF screen, except as one part of the check to see whether they do the special CV TF reaction that occurs after the air search phases. Somewhere, there is documentation that only certain TF types react using the Reaction (0-6) setting. AFAIK, CV TFs are not among them.

MakeeLearn -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/23/2018 7:52:26 PM)
CV TFs and reaction - is this normal? http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3981268&mpage=1&key=reaction� quote: ... 3. There are 2 distinct types of naval reaction. Type (A) is based on seahex range and applies to all types of combat TF, be they surface, carrier, sub et al task forces, whilst type (B) is based on hex range and applies only to a carrier TF. It is type (B) which is meant to be explained by s.6.3.4 of the manual. Much of the confusion expressed by players over carrier TF reacting is due to the fact that both types of reaction are in play and not just s.6.3.4 of the manual. 4. The max react button on the TF screen is misunderstood. It's primary function is to toggle on/off whether a naval reaction might occur. Set the reaction button to a 0 range setting tells the code to not check for a type (A) reaction BUT remember that a CV TF also answers to a type (B) reaction where the 0 range setting can be overridden. ... Alfred

modrow -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/23/2018 8:28:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn CV TFs and reaction - is this normal? http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3981268&mpage=1&key=reaction� quote: ... 3. There are 2 distinct types of naval reaction. Type (A) is based on seahex range and applies to all types of combat TF, be they surface, carrier, sub et al task forces, whilst type (B) is based on hex range and applies only to a carrier TF. It is type (B) which is meant to be explained by s.6.3.4 of the manual. Much of the confusion expressed by players over carrier TF reacting is due to the fact that both types of reaction are in play and not just s.6.3.4 of the manual. 4. The max react button on the TF screen is misunderstood. It's primary function is to toggle on/off whether a naval reaction might occur. Set the reaction button to a 0 range setting tells the code to not check for a type (A) reaction BUT remember that a CV TF also answers to a type (B) reaction where the 0 range setting can be overridden. ... Alfred Thanks for providing this link. Based on the wording of section 6.2.5 of the manual (to which the type A reaction, which seems to correspond to the night/day phase reaction in my post refers), I would not have concluded that setting the reaction setting to 0 will override the check, but maybe I put too much meaning to this wording (emphasis added): "Unless set to follow another Task Force, Carrier TFs will react to enemy carrier forces and try and avoid enemy surface combat forces. Carrier TFs set to follow another TF are assumed to be providing air cover to that TF." Hartwig

Lokasenna -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/24/2018 5:04:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hartwig.modrow "Unless set to follow another Task Force, Carrier TFs will react to enemy carrier forces and try and avoid enemy surface combat forces. Carrier TFs set to follow another TF are assumed to be providing air cover to that TF." Hartwig I have documented CV TFs reacting with the special CV reaction move while set to follow other TFs. Also note that the patch notes provided by Michael (which I quoted above) override anything in the manual that they contradict or add on to.

Canoerebel -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/25/2018 10:04:00 PM)
9/1/44 A titanic battle just took place at Shikuka. Erik brought everything he had against the base - subs, combat ships, LBA, carrier air. The defenders performed very, very well until the tail end of the battle. Allied mines took a heavy toll on enemy subs and, to a lesser extent, his combat ships. Allied combat TFs dished out more than they took, especially to enemy CAs, CLs, and DDs. As best I can piece together from the combat report (I haven't run the turn yet), the long series of surface combats flushed my navy out from under protection of LBA, resulting in a bunch of my capital ships getting heavily damaged or sunk by enemy LBA and carrier air towards the end of things. Then, Erik's bombardments got to the airfield and wrought havoc, destroying hundreds of planes on the ground (including a lot of B-29s). If my level nine airfield is closed, I'm in trouble. Heck, I'm probably in trouble anyway. I probably don't have anything much in the way of capital ships left. My massive merchant fleet is thus susceptible to annihilation. This is very, very bad. On the other hand, Erik took a lot of damage, especially to subs and combat ships (and, to a lesser extent, to his air forces). On yet another hand, this is the 9/1/44 turn, so all my CVEs just went into upgrade mode for three weeks! This leaves me in a poor position to send the cavalry into play to draw Erik's attention and keep him more honest. My CV/CVL fleet is pretty stout, but I'd prefer not to use them, too, for about three weeks. By then, I'll have four additional CVs available. Sometime tonight, I'll run the turn and take measure of the carnage. The biggest decision to make will be whether to sortie the CVs and CVLs, hoping to draw Erik's attention for a time. I could lose a vast, vast number of ships here, but there is no danger of losing Sikhalin Island (unless I truly lose the carrier battle that will eventually take place). In some ways, I think what happened today at Shikuka will have seriously eroded Erik's ability to wage war. He'll harvest a great deal of points (and that's serious) but he won't be able to counterinvade and he'll probably be in a poorer position to withstand the battles yet to come.

MakeeLearn -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/25/2018 11:21:12 PM)
From Beta2 readme1126.pdf V1.01.26� 17 September 2016 (Game version shown as 1.8.11.26b) 36. Tweak DL on enemy CVTF to be 3+ to trigger CV reaction; was non-zero DL 37. Fix CVTF reported reacting to enemy CVTF more than once per phase How does this impact the info from the link I provided above? 2 distinct types of naval reaction. The naval reaction algorithm is checked every single hex traveled through. etc.

HansBolter -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/26/2018 10:00:07 AM)
I'm running 1126 and still getting more than 1 hex of reaction per phase. No one wants to believe me so this weekend I'll search for a saved game of the turn where it occurred and post that save for others to run, If I can find it. Limiting CAP to zero range has it's drawbacks. If CAP had been set at normal three hex range those ships that retreated away from the Port would have had air cover.

Canoerebel -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/26/2018 12:50:14 PM)
9/1/44 Naval Battle of Sikhalin Island: Truly an epic naval/air battle at Shikuka. Eric first flooded the port with subs, many of which hit mines, but a few scored hits, including one on CA Baltimore and one on BB New Mexico. Then, Eric sent in every kind of ship he had: CA, CL, DD, DMS, E, AMC, SC. There were a zillion of them. These battles were hard fought and mostly went in favor of the Allies. But, as you'd guess, it emptied ammo bunkers and spread the Allied TFs around, out from under friendly CAP. Then came LBA and carrier air. Allied fighters handled this, downing hundreds of enemy planes (mostly Peggys and Zero 8s) at low cost. But at the end, a some carrier strikes and one Frances strike got through, enough to finish off ships, damage others, and sink BBs New Mexico and Mississippi and BC Renown. By then, CAs Minneapolis and Baltimore had also gone under, along with a few CLs and some DDs. In return, Eric lost six or more CLs and a bunch of modern DDs, a host of smaller stuff, and some heavy damage to his CA fleet. But three big BB TFs made it in unscathed to bombard, brushing aside PT TF opposition and absorbing a few mine hits by DDs. The bombardments were nuclear, destroying nearly 600 aircraft on the ground, including nearly 100 B-29s. Damage to the airfield is severe - 100% service and 78% runway. I lost plenty of fighters to the bombardments but can put up a decent number if Eric doesn't have fresh TFs available. Usually, bombardments on Day 2 are weak, so I'll have to see. Erik even landed a ground unit in a forest hex between Shikuka and Toyohara. I have one RCT in each of those hexes, so I hold the important hexsides. I suppose he did this to prevent rail transport of squadrons that enhances the rebuild rate. I lost a sizeable chunk of my covering combat force....and most of the remaining good stuff is a hex or two from Shikuka and very low on ammo. They're ordered to return to port and may get savaged if any of Eric's combat TFs have ammo. I don't know how this will go. It's key though. If I lose my remaining CAs, yikes. At Shikuka, I was able to replenish one good DD TF, one TF of moderately damaged CA/DDs. I created a host of additional PT TFs and even some DE combat TFs (one DE TF yesterday finished off two enemy CLs low on ammo with torps). All of the subs in port, including the moderately damaged ones, have been formed into patrolling TFs. The timeing of this was made worse by 50 USN CVEs going into the yards for upgrades that will take three weeks. I have available for duty 11 CV, 10 CVL, and 8 CVE. In three weeks, I'll have three more CVs and those 50 CVEs. Whether I send what I have now depends alot on what happens tomorrow. If my remaining combat ships at Shikuka get savaged, I may have to at least post a Death Star east of the Kuriles to try to get Eric's attention a bit. Going forward, in about 25-30 days, Death Star and many stout combat TFs will be ready for action. The enemy to be faced will have been attrited meaningfully - especially subs, CLs and DDs.

BBfanboy -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/26/2018 1:42:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Canoerebel 9/1/44 Naval Battle of Sikhalin Island: Truly an epic naval/air battle at Shikuka. Eric first flooded the port with subs, many of which hit mines, but a few scored hits, including one on CA Baltimore and one on BB New Mexico. Then, Eric sent in every kind of ship he had: CA, CL, DD, DMS, E, AMC, SC. There were a zillion of them. These battles were hard fought and mostly went in favor of the Allies. But, as you'd guess, it emptied ammo bunkers and spread the Allied TFs around, out from under friendly CAP. Then came LBA and carrier air. Allied fighters handled this, downing hundreds of enemy planes (mostly Peggys and Zero 8s) at low cost. But at the end, a some carrier strikes and one Frances strike got through, enough to finish off ships, damage others, and sink BBs New Mexico and Mississippi and BC Renown. By then, CAs Minneapolis and Baltimore had also gone under, along with a few CLs and some DDs. In return, Eric lost six or more CLs and a bunch of modern DDs, a host of smaller stuff, and some heavy damage to his CA fleet. But three big BB TFs made it in unscathed to bombard, brushing aside PT TF opposition and absorbing a few mine hits by DDs. The bombardments were nuclear, destroying nearly 600 aircraft on the ground, including nearly 100 B-29s. Damage to the airfield is severe - 100% service and 78% runway. I lost plenty of fighters to the bombardments but can put up a decent number if Eric doesn't have fresh TFs available. Usually, bombardments on Day 2 are weak, so I'll have to see. Erik even landed a ground unit in a forest hex between Shikuka and Toyohara. I have one RCT in each of those hexes, so I hold the important hexsides. I suppose he did this to prevent rail transport of squadrons that enhances the rebuild rate. I lost a sizeable chunk of my covering combat force....and most of the remaining good stuff is a hex or two from Shikuka and very low on ammo. They're ordered to return to port and may get savaged if any of Eric's combat TFs have ammo. I don't know how this will go. It's key though. If I lose my remaining CAs, yikes. At Shikuka, I was able to replenish one good DD TF, one TF of moderately damaged CA/DDs. I created a host of additional PT TFs and even some DE combat TFs (one DE TF yesterday finished off two enemy CLs low on ammo with torps). All of the subs in port, including the moderately damaged ones, have been formed into patrolling TFs. The timeing of this was made worse by 50 USN CVEs going into the yards for upgrades that will take three weeks. I have available for duty 11 CV, 10 CVL, and 8 CVE. In three weeks, I'll have three more CVs and those 50 CVEs. Whether I send what I have now depends alot on what happens tomorrow. If my remaining combat ships at Shikuka get savaged, I may have to at least post a Death Star east of the Kuriles to try to get Eric's attention a bit. Going forward, in about 25-30 days, Death Star and many stout combat TFs will be ready for action. The enemy to be faced will have been attrited meaningfully - especially subs, CLs and DDs. Yikes - that sounds like an anxiety elevating turn to watch! The big question is whether he has more to throw at you before DS can return, especially troops. If your airfields have been neutered he can bring huge numbers of troops over the next month. Can you grab Onnekotan Jima while he is focused on your Sakhalin bases?

Canoerebel -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/26/2018 1:52:44 PM)
I don't think he can counter-invade Toyohara or Shikuka. Both have many thousands of AV, the former behind seven forts, the latter behind eight forts, with plenty of supply (his bombardments barely touched supply). I can't invade Onnektoan or any other island at the moment because most (not all) of my Kuriles-prepping troops are on Sikhalin Island. And I don't think I want to risk my carriers yet - I'd rather come with all of them in three weeks. In the meantime, Erik shouldn't be able to reclaim Sikhalin, but he can sink 700 or more ships if I lose all my defenses. That's my biggest concern at the moment, although I have others nearly as big. I think the battle had a measurable effect on his ability to engage Death Star in a month. He lost a bunch of DDs and CLs; I think quite a few CAs took moderate damage; some 22 subs hit mines. To counter that, Death Star should be immense, and the escorting combat TFs will be first team and numerous. I'd wanted the bombers at Sikhalin to help suppress the LBA during the coming campaign, but all bets off on that now.

Lokasenna -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/26/2018 2:09:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Canoerebel 9/1/44 A titanic battle just took place at Shikuka. Erik brought everything he had against the base - subs, combat ships, LBA, carrier air. The defenders performed very, very well until the tail end of the battle. Allied mines took a heavy toll on enemy subs and, to a lesser extent, his combat ships. Allied combat TFs dished out more than they took, especially to enemy CAs, CLs, and DDs. As best I can piece together from the combat report (I haven't run the turn yet), the long series of surface combats flushed my navy out from under protection of LBA, resulting in a bunch of my capital ships getting heavily damaged or sunk by enemy LBA and carrier air towards the end of things. Then, Erik's bombardments got to the airfield and wrought havoc, destroying hundreds of planes on the ground (including a lot of B-29s). If my level nine airfield is closed, I'm in trouble. Heck, I'm probably in trouble anyway. I probably don't have anything much in the way of capital ships left. My massive merchant fleet is thus susceptible to annihilation. This is very, very bad. On the other hand, Erik took a lot of damage, especially to subs and combat ships (and, to a lesser extent, to his air forces). On yet another hand, this is the 9/1/44 turn, so all my CVEs just went into upgrade mode for three weeks! This leaves me in a poor position to send the cavalry into play to draw Erik's attention and keep him more honest. My CV/CVL fleet is pretty stout, but I'd prefer not to use them, too, for about three weeks. By then, I'll have four additional CVs available. Sometime tonight, I'll run the turn and take measure of the carnage. The biggest decision to make will be whether to sortie the CVs and CVLs, hoping to draw Erik's attention for a time. I could lose a vast, vast number of ships here, but there is no danger of losing Sikhalin Island (unless I truly lose the carrier battle that will eventually take place). In some ways, I think what happened today at Shikuka will have seriously eroded Erik's ability to wage war. He'll harvest a great deal of points (and that's serious) but he won't be able to counterinvade and he'll probably be in a poorer position to withstand the battles yet to come. It sounds like a probably tactical loss, but his losses may make it worthwhile in the long run. It's still September 1944, after all.

Canoerebel -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/26/2018 2:21:22 PM)
Yes, definitely a tactical loss. It was a late-arriving loss, though. It was like the Braves playing the Yankees in a tough, close-fought game. Through eight innings of scratching and clawing, the Braves managed to build a 3-1 lead. Then, with one out in the 9th, the Bronx bombers ravage the Braves bullpen, scoring 9 runs to win 10-3. The battle had gone remarkably well until the BB bombardment TFs got through at the very end. I agree that the battle could also play a positive role long run - possibly, not certainly. One way of spoiling that would be to commit my carriers piecemeal. So I think I'll have to just endure what's to come until all are present and accounted for (although I might show what's currently available well to the east of the Kuriles, perhaps buying a day or two of divided attention). I'm not sure yet.

witpqs -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/26/2018 3:20:51 PM)
A long time ago MichaelM made the change so that repair/construction performance is influenced by the status of the unit re disruption, fatigue and so on. After that pounding you might find recovery slower than you would otherwise expect if the engineers' ears are still ringing.

Canoerebel -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/26/2018 3:22:38 PM)
Engineers are fairly disrupted - 78% - which will dampen repairs. But with more than 1,000 engineering squads present and plenty of engineer vehicles, it won't take too long. Assuming, that is, that fresh bombardments or massed bombings don't succeed next turn.

Anachro -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/26/2018 3:44:52 PM)
I will be following the events of the next few months in this game closely. Interesting situation and will be certainly fun to watch how you respond.

witpqs -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/26/2018 3:50:24 PM)
How are your fortifications? I'm wondering about their impact on thwarting more disruption from air strikes.

HansBolter -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/26/2018 4:24:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: witpqs How are your fortifications? I'm wondering about their impact on thwarting more disruption from air strikes. He mentioned a while back that they are level 8 and 9.

witpqs -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/26/2018 4:31:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HansBolter quote: ORIGINAL: witpqs How are your fortifications? I'm wondering about their impact on thwarting more disruption from air strikes. He mentioned a while back that they are level 8 and 9. Thx. Air raids shouldn't matter much for disruption AFAIK.

BillBrown -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/26/2018 4:37:09 PM)
Isn't the terrain also JR?

Canoerebel -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/26/2018 4:52:32 PM)
A bit more info and a small correction: (1) Toyohara is wooded terrain with level 7 forts; (2) Shikuka is clear terrain with level 8 forts. Erik has probably considered counterinvading from the start. He'll know it'll be a tall task. He knows he first has to take control of Shikuka and batter its supply and troops. He can do that if his navy and air force has unfettered access to the base for a long time. I don't think he will. One thing's for sure: he won't be able to accomplish that within a month. So the outcome of the looming carrier battle will deterimine the fate of everything. If I lose that, so that I can't relieve/support Shikuka, I'm in big, big, big trouble. If I win that, the war becomes a mathematical equation: I'll be able to support/supply those bases; I'll be able to use them to mount bombardments from there; and I'll be counterinvading with a massive navy. So, really, it's the carrier battle that's going to determine the outcome of everything. That's why I feel an urgency to wait until the CVEs and repairing CVs are available in three weeks.

BillBrown -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/26/2018 5:04:57 PM)
I was at work and couldn't check it.

Canoerebel -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/26/2018 10:37:54 PM)
9/1/44 Battle of Shikuka: It was complicated, massive, and drawn out. There's so much info, I don't know how to post in a meaningful way that's concise. Here's the critical aspects. [image]local://upfiles/8143/C4524A405FC14C16B56A885809FD225C.jpg[/image]

Canoerebel -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/26/2018 11:13:08 PM)
9/1/44 IJN Ships Sunk: This is a partial tally, including all the larger IJN ships. Whittling the cruisers, destroyers and subs is a good thing, but this cost has been enormous and will get "enormouser" before all is said and done. [image]local://upfiles/8143/2CBA8DBA22E94E5EA702C0CC0F1FB5C7.jpg[/image]

Canoerebel -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/26/2018 11:16:29 PM)
9/1/44 Allied Ships Sunk: Here are the major ones, from BB through DD. [image]local://upfiles/8143/CA544209329349DDAC9CAAA108946E65.jpg[/image]

Canoerebel -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/26/2018 11:21:39 PM)
9/1/44 USN CVEs: A partial list of the CVEs that entered the yards for upgrade on the very turn that I'd have recalled them to active duty, had I the chance. [image]local://upfiles/8143/B0BDAF757FD44BD8934486FDCE2DAC25.jpg[/image]

Canoerebel -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/27/2018 12:46:54 AM)
9/2/44 Battle of Shikuka: Continuing with the baseball analogy, the scrappy Braves baseball team eaked out frightening and bloody 2-1 victory over the hated Yankees. Many key players are injured or worn out. There are serious questions whether the team can survive until the reinforcements (carriers) arrive. The Yankees took some lumps today, but once they refresh and regroup, they should be able to take control of the field until those reinforcements can make it. At Sea: Yet another incredibly long round of combats around Shikuka. Both sides are low on ammo, leading to many "dry" conflicts. But enough ships had ammo to result in alot of sinkings. The Allies lost another CL or two and at least one CA, plus additional DDs and DEs. Japan lost a fresh CA and a bunch more DDs, a few subs, and a ton of riff-raff. The Allies have two decent TFs left, but they are stuck out in the waters without ammo and without any apparent way to return to port (Erik is flooding the zone so that my ships keep pulling away despite "direct/absolute" orders. I do have mines left, some subs, and plenty of PT boats. But this is going to be very hard. The enemy BBs, an perhaps most of the CAs, are still nearby and out of ammo too, so it may take Eric four or five days to get his own guys sorted out and back to bombard. In the Air: Eric lost 400+ aircraf today to 100+ for the Allies. As hoped, the CAP over Shikuka was able to parry effectively, downing many enemy fighters and bombers. AA also claimed it's share. My engineers are still a bit disrupted, so airfield repairs were meager, and somewhat offset by a few enemy bombs scoring hits. Over two days, Eric has lost 800+ aircraft. I've lost 700+. Those are big numbers. Ground: Allies boot enemy mixed brigade detachment from Sikhalin Island. CVEs: All of them went into "shipyard," overwhelming it and thus not progressing on repairs. I'v converted them to "pierside," and that should allow the upgrade to commence. 19 more days, according to the AI. I hope that's accurate. I'm sending more ships to the Aleutians in preparation for what's to come.

Canoerebel -> RE: Notes from a Small Island (4/27/2018 3:02:41 AM)
9/2/44 The Cauldron: What immense devastation has been wrought here over the past two days. The Allies have taken a beating locally. The real question is whether Japan is weakening itself too much as a bigger battle looms in some three weeks. [image]local://upfiles/8143/AF231F03A19346C8B76875023704A3BB.jpg[/image]

Page: << < prev 22 23 [24] 25 26 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.90625