RE: Carry out Operation Husky (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> The Operational Art of War IV >> After Action Reports



Message


tverse -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky (2/6/2018 3:29:29 PM)

PM – July 22, 1943 (T27)

Patton wants to be First in Messina!

Note: I am landing troops in the same place as Patton but I am landing two regiments not just a couple of battalions.



[image]local://upfiles/55217/6C3432CC53B04E4D827D0154F602B8E8.jpg[/image]




tverse -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky (2/6/2018 3:30:52 PM)

PM – July 22, 1943 (T27)

Race for Messina.

1st Cdn – will move northeast towards Messina.
231st Bde & 51st Div. & 23rd Arm. – These units no longer can attack more than once per turn.
Will start to swap out with fresh units from XIII corps

7th Army – continue push to Messina on the northwest side of the Island.


[image]local://upfiles/55217/1C9E3551A2DF4F90A5CE42DD221CC7BA.jpg[/image]




tverse -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky (2/7/2018 1:25:03 PM)

PM – July 23, 1943 (T29)

All Roads Lead to Messina.

3rd Division – Regiments 7th and 15th have successfully established beachhead.
Will start to funnel in additional troops.

5th and 50th Divisions- Rested units of XIII Corps arriving to replace XXX Corps Units.



[image]local://upfiles/55217/5AB9D2CE26C14CEC8788CB95278BB145.jpg[/image]




tverse -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky (2/7/2018 3:08:09 PM)

PM – July 23, 1943 (T29) Round 2

Axis Resistance is strong this round of battles.

Axis units successfully defend position.


[image]local://upfiles/55217/BDFDDEB486494807BB319126F3ACC632.jpg[/image]




tverse -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky (2/7/2018 3:10:00 PM)

AM – July 24, 1943 (T30)

Axis had back-to-back turns.

The axis air did significant damage US Navy ships supporting the 3rd Division Beach Landing.

They will be pulled back.


[image]local://upfiles/55217/0EEACFE3EC534D7D8372BF87EFD4204D.jpg[/image]




tverse -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky (2/7/2018 6:05:05 PM)

AM – July 25, 1943 (T32)

Overview of Forces.



[image]local://upfiles/55217/32A7F545AC6A4E579D9695707D8C8F7B.jpg[/image]




tverse -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky (2/8/2018 1:55:46 PM)

AM – July 26, 1943 (T34)

The CW Navy takes a beating from Axis Airforce.



[image]local://upfiles/55217/E2DECA079F0841159A594FF8DCC77867.jpg[/image]




tverse -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky (2/8/2018 2:58:24 PM)

AM – July 26, 1943 (T34) round 2

Axis putting a stiff resistance and successfully defend in four places.
Following posts show results from two of these battles.



[image]local://upfiles/55217/E267F728D8B246749862E1338449E4E7.jpg[/image]




tverse -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky (2/8/2018 2:59:24 PM)

AM – July 26, 1943 (T34) round 2

CW suffered 11% losses versus 0% for Axis.
Axis unit is a 15th Pzr Grp Infantry (mot). The unit did split into three companies and two of them retreated.
What is not shown is the Axis supporting 10Xartillery units.



[image]local://upfiles/55217/7C4343C277394B9D924BF0197F64D8A3.jpg[/image]




tverse -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky (2/8/2018 3:00:19 PM)

AM – July 26, 1943 (T34) round 2

US suffered 131% losses versus 11% for Axis.
Axis unit is a HG Pzr Division Mech Infantry Bn.
What is not shown is the Axis supporting 9Xartillery units.



[image]local://upfiles/55217/DC800412C90642D0AB138BC87CFF816C.jpg[/image]




wags133 -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon (2/8/2018 3:25:43 PM)

I know this has nothing to do with this particular thread but the map and unit icons are great. Can you let me know where I can locate and download. I updated the map a while back but this is much better.

Thanks.




tverse -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon (2/8/2018 5:11:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: wags133

I know this has nothing to do with this particular thread but the map and unit icons are great. Can you let me know where I can locate and download. I updated the map a while back but this is much better.

Thanks.


The only mods I use is railroad damage, bridge damage, and formation highlite (red and yelllow) . I got these from Silvanski mods in the mod section of forum. Everything else is from the scenario and toaw4 basic package.




wags133 -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon (2/8/2018 5:44:34 PM)

I will check it out. The terrain was much nicer. Sorry to ask, but what is the TOAW4 basic package. I want to make sure, I access the correct MOD. Thanks again.




wags133 -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon (2/8/2018 5:46:59 PM)

You can disregard my last message. I'm good.




tverse -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon (2/8/2018 5:57:45 PM)

PM – July 26, 1943 (T35)

Bombs Away!

I moved all the artillery as close to the front as possible.
Then I went for a massive bombardment campaign with artillery and the available air units freed for combat support.
The results are listed below…not really overwhelming but a few with measurable outcomes.




[image]local://upfiles/55217/5742E7A729874DA483B5DB0347BBFD7E.jpg[/image]




tverse -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon (2/9/2018 2:52:46 PM)

PM – July 27, 1943 (T37)

Germans start to retreat!



[image]local://upfiles/55217/7286707829D44875AF459258514EFA2C.jpg[/image]




tverse -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon (2/9/2018 2:53:53 PM)

PM – July 27, 1943 (T37)

My units are a little ahead of historical.



[image]local://upfiles/55217/E5C428CF1B394678B954BC8497AC144A.jpg[/image]




tverse -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon (2/9/2018 8:33:19 PM)

AM – July 28, 1943 (T38)

Axis Air attack both US and CW navies.

CW Navy (#1) – Battleship Warspite takes damage during battle.
US Navy (#2) – Axis air attacks ships in harbor. No damage to any allied units.



[image]local://upfiles/55217/B685D51E7D85469085525336DB2A1C0A.jpg[/image]




tverse -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon (2/9/2018 8:34:38 PM)

AM – July 28, 1943 (T38) round 2

To the bitter end.

Round 2 - Axis delivers significant damage to attacking Allied units.
Round 3 – Allies do better second attack but still suffer heavy losses. Allies capture territory.



[image]local://upfiles/55217/951B8796E2544D2E9BC6AA166C6F2E7B.jpg[/image]




ChuckBerger -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon (2/10/2018 12:52:41 AM)

Am I reading this right, have you lost 3 cruisers and something like 27 destroyers?? Axis air power was not capable of this kind of effectiveness at this point in the war. I wonder about naval power in this game, between this AAR and Warspite's AAR on the desert campaign, it seems naval/air and naval/ground interactions are substantially out of whack.




devoncop -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon (2/10/2018 6:58:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ChuckBerger

Am I reading this right, have you lost 3 cruisers and something like 27 destroyers?? Axis air power was not capable of this kind of effectiveness at this point in the war. I wonder about naval power in this game, between this AAR and Warspite's AAR on the desert campaign, it seems naval/air and naval/ground interactions are substantially out of whack.
and

I would not be so sure about things being out of kilter. As Warspites opponent in the CFNA I can't see his AAR for obvious reasons so don't know what his views are but the damage my ground troops took from his naval bombardments were my own fault for not utilising the Luftwaffe properly early enough. This was my first campaign playing TOAW IV and I am making a lot of mistakes.

The eventual effectiveness of the JU87s seems to have negated the naval power v land forces issue in our game. A post mortem will no doubt discuss whether it would have been possible for Warspite to protect his fleet differently but I would not judge the game mechanics on the experience of 2 novice players.

As far as this scenario is concerned do the allies have all available fighters and fighter bombers on air superiority missions to maximise Luftwaffe losses? Also having ships away from mutually supporting stacks ...particularly smaller destroyers makes them much more vulnerable. When I tried a second hard strike against stacks containing battleships and heavy cruisers I had much less success.




warspite1 -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon (2/10/2018 8:49:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: devoncop


quote:

ORIGINAL: ChuckBerger

Am I reading this right, have you lost 3 cruisers and something like 27 destroyers?? Axis air power was not capable of this kind of effectiveness at this point in the war. I wonder about naval power in this game, between this AAR and Warspite's AAR on the desert campaign, it seems naval/air and naval/ground interactions are substantially out of whack.
and

I would not be so sure about things being out of kilter. As Warspites opponent in the CFNA I can't see his AAR for obvious reasons so don't know what his views are but the damage my ground troops took from his naval bombardments were my own fault for not utilising the Luftwaffe properly early enough. This was my first campaign playing TOAW IV and I am making a lot of mistakes.

The eventual effectiveness of the JU87s seems to have negated the naval power v land forces issue in our game. A post mortem will no doubt discuss whether it would have been possible for Warspite to protect his fleet differently but I would not judge the game mechanics on the experience of 2 novice players.

As far as this scenario is concerned do the allies have all available fighters and fighter bombers on air superiority missions to maximise Luftwaffe losses? Also having ships away from mutually supporting stacks ...particularly smaller destroyers makes them much more vulnerable. When I tried a second hard strike against stacks containing battleships and heavy cruisers I had much less success.
warspite1

The way that the AI was attacking and then devoncop initially, seemed to suggest the RN were impervious and could roam the coastline at will. With the use of the right aircraft (I'm not sure what, if anything else has changed) the position of the RN is completely different. They simply can't afford to stay at sea or they will be liable to get sunk or damaged.

As my opponent says, we are a couple of novices at TOAW so I wouldn't draw too many definitive conclusions from our game - but the initial fear about the RN being too powerful is wrong [;)]




tverse -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon (2/10/2018 9:38:54 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ChuckBerger

Am I reading this right, have you lost 3 cruisers and something like 27 destroyers?? Axis air power was not capable of this kind of effectiveness at this point in the war. I wonder about naval power in this game, between this AAR and Warspite's AAR on the desert campaign, it seems naval/air and naval/ground interactions are substantially out of whack.


I can’t really say if the naval power is out of whack or not. All I can say is that I have left the air assist on for the whole game in an effort to simulate the lack of coordination between land and air forces. However, in the naval losses several of those posted did have allied air support I just did not always show it. I know that does not address the effectiveness of axis air power.




tverse -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon (2/10/2018 1:28:19 PM)

AM – July 29, 1943 (T40)

Overview.

CCB/2nd Arm – Unfortunately these units have picked a poor time to reorganize
and they cannot be moved out of the way to bring in other troops.

Patton is irate to have his advance slowed down.


[image]local://upfiles/55217/9A394273FAA44825A1AA3C59B2C3EC15.jpg[/image]




devoncop -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon (2/10/2018 2:40:02 PM)

You are still ahead of schedule so Patton looking down (or up) wherever he is now ...would be happy.

The air assistant is lethally bad imo. Both myself and Warspite noticed it would routinely change aircraft assignments each turn with no logic. If nothing else it should be prioritising air superiority with your Navy active over and interdiction as the Axis are barely moving.





tverse -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon (2/10/2018 2:52:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: devoncop

You are still ahead of schedule so Patton looking down (or up) wherever he is now ...would be happy.

The air assistant is lethally bad imo. Both myself and Warspite noticed it would routinely change aircraft assignments each turn with no logic. If nothing else it should be prioritising air superiority with your Navy active over and interdiction as the Axis are barely moving.




The Air assistant does have some questionable assignments...I've had it rest perfectly healthy units when I could have used them, but as I said early I choose not to use it as a simulation of history. It does however interdict as the Axis try to withdraw.




tverse -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon (2/10/2018 2:55:03 PM)

PM – August 1, 1943 (T47)

US Army Takes Messina.

After several days of “knock down drag out” fighting all of Sicily is now Allied territory.

Note: I did hold the CW units back to allow Patton his minor victory



[image]local://upfiles/55217/4B1B6FF234AE4A00B8A59C4BFAFB80D8.jpg[/image]




tverse -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon (2/10/2018 2:56:10 PM)

Conclusion


[image]local://upfiles/55217/FA5D254C0DF4418CAFB92118806A46BF.jpg[/image]




tverse -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon (2/10/2018 2:57:11 PM)

A Final Thought from the Author of the Book.

This ends the AAR . I hope you enjoyed the approach which was more about the story than about how well I played the scenario.

Thanks for viewing.


[image]local://upfiles/55217/6E17EFC9AF23415FA6F07E2946AC9FCC.jpg[/image]




Curtis Lemay -> RE: Carry out Operation Husky - Map & Icon (2/11/2018 2:25:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ChuckBerger

Am I reading this right, have you lost 3 cruisers and something like 27 destroyers?? Axis air power was not capable of this kind of effectiveness at this point in the war. I wonder about naval power in this game, between this AAR and Warspite's AAR on the desert campaign, it seems naval/air and naval/ground interactions are substantially out of whack.

This scenario probably has never had its Naval AD adjusted yet.

Nevertheless, it is a wargame: Players can make completely different choices with their forces than the historical participants.




Page: <<   < prev  2 3 4 [5] 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.046875