RE: Singapore and Rangoon

RE: Singapore and Rangoon (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945

Message

Andy Mac -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/28/2004 1:38:47 PM)
Hmmmm its a difficult one. The only real way to regain control of Bay of Bengal is to put pressure on another region and force KB to move to counter. I suspect that RN just doesnt have the strength ( the 4 R class BB's are slow and very very vulnerable to Air Attack from Dive Bombers). One idea if Rangoon Airport is still in op is to move all Hurris and P40's of the AVG in and try and force an air battle close to Rangoon harbour. Make it a big convoy and try and get it into air range of Rangoon then use LRCAP to protect the convoy P40's on LRCAP Hurris on CAP over Airfield you will lose a lot of ships but you may force KB to withdraw to re arm. The danger is if IJN catches the convoy out of range of LBA then it will get wiped. So no I dont think there are any easy answers

Ron Saueracker -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/28/2004 4:39:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Andy Mac Hmmmm its a difficult one. The only real way to regain control of Bay of Bengal is to put pressure on another region and force KB to move to counter. I suspect that RN just doesnt have the strength ( the 4 R class BB's are slow and very very vulnerable to Air Attack from Dive Bombers). One idea if Rangoon Airport is still in op is to move all Hurris and P40's of the AVG in and try and force an air battle close to Rangoon harbour. Make it a big convoy and try and get it into air range of Rangoon then use LRCAP to protect the convoy P40's on LRCAP Hurris on CAP over Airfield you will lose a lot of ships but you may force KB to withdraw to re arm. The danger is if IJN catches the convoy out of range of LBA then it will get wiped. So no I dont think there are any easy answers Convoy as bait? That is just soooo wrong. Stop making the chalk screech on the chalk board![sm=Christo_pull_hair.gif]

Raverdave -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/28/2004 4:42:16 PM)
Too bloody long.....not at least until late'42. I need control much sooner that that if I am to hold Burma.

tondern -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/28/2004 4:45:35 PM)
Dear All: Wow. What a souped-up PAC war machine! While not wanting to be a slave to historical accuracy, RaverDave's loss of Singapore four weeks early seems precipitous. Why is it a problem that Singapore fell four weeks early? The British defense plan was based on the Russian Port Arthur strategy of 1904-05. Dig in behind strong prepared defenses (Singapore itself) and slaughter excellent Japanese troops that were squandered in frontal attacks against massed artillery and machine guns. It probably would have worked well, as it did for the Russians. Only thing was that the water supply for Singapore was on the wrong side of the defenses. Someone on the general staff was not being very clever. On discovering this problem Percival surrendered to prevent hardship to the civilian population. He did not surrender out of military necessity, and was in a strong defensive position. His retreat along the Malay penninsula was designed to slow the Japanese advance without wasting any of his forces. They were to be saved for the siege defense. Had he fought along the way the Japanese advance would have presumably been much slower. So, with minimal resistance (until Singapore itself) it took the Japanese four more weeks to get down to Singapore. And the Brits (and Aussies and Indians) could have held out far longer except for the quaint notion of protecting civilians. This tells me that the real-world supply problems for the Japanese advance were probably prohibitive of a faster advance. And given any attempt at resistance the advace would have slowed and required more supply. It therefore appears that the game makes the Japanese advance on Singapore far too easy. Also, according to my Atlas collection the Saigon main airfields are about 1.5 hexs further from Singapore than on the game map. Timjot's excellent comments got me thinking. Would this explain the relative ease with which the British brought in many supply convoys despite their lack of air cover? (It appears that in the game a resupply convoy would be costly). Can this be easily fixed? What say you? Yours, Tondern

Raverdave -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/28/2004 4:51:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stubby331 Also, What is the upgrade path for the Gladiators and Swordfish of the FAA? I had an idea that you could send the Hermes back to blighty for a refit/upgrade and leave the airproups based somewhere handy. I am sure that the Gladiators get replaced with Fairey Fulmars [8\|], but I can't recall what replaces the Swordfish.

Mr.Frag -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/28/2004 5:02:24 PM)
quote: but I can't recall what replaces the Swordfish Barracuda

Raverdave -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/28/2004 5:12:33 PM)
tondern, There has already been a lot of talk as to why Singers fell so quickly, one of the main reasons is that Luskan did not use Historical forces to the attack on the Malay peninsula, and I did not use historic reinforcements to bolster the defences. However you will note that the PI and also Rangoon are still doing well for early Feb. Only thing was that the water supply for Singapore was on the wrong side of the defenses. Someone on the general staff was not being very clever. On discovering this problem Percival surrendered to prevent hardship to the civilian population. He did not surrender out of military necessity, and was in a strong defensive position. Percival did not surrender out of military necessity? Bollocks! The Japanese had already breached the Islands defences and were having a field day. Percival was an idiot and had no idea what he was doing inregards to fighting a war. Actually you can sneek in convoys with ease, and I have pulled many troops out of Singers in other PBEMs against Luskan without him having any idea (I made the decision that no Aussie soldier should be squandered in the defence of Singapore, but that was early on in our testing), and so it would be just as easy to get ships in. So long as you keep the convoys small (I even like to use single ships rather than a TF) the detection level is kept low. I am not able to comment on the airfield at Saigon being 90 miles in the wrong place (So you are saying that Saigon itself is in the wrong place on the map?).

Raverdave -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/28/2004 5:15:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag quote: but I can't recall what replaces the Swordfish Barracuda Oh yes the Barracuda, another wonderful Fleet Air Arm aircraft[8\|]

jhdeerslayer -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/28/2004 5:27:36 PM)
Barracuda [image]local://upfiles/6592/Nl297154218.jpg[/image]

Pkunzipper -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/28/2004 5:48:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mr.Frag quote: but I can't recall what replaces the Swordfish Barracuda Wasn't the Albacore??

tondern -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/28/2004 10:46:21 PM)
Dear Raverdave, Well, without "historical" force levels and if you decided to loss minimize at Singapore, then there is nothing wrong with the result. Except, if I were Mr. Banana, I might assume you would bring out all or some of the Australians, and therefore attack with less than historical force. I also seem to remember something about the Japanese coming in over an improperly defended causeway. The causeway was improperly defended because it was supposed to be blown up. It was not blown up because it carried the water aqueduct. Is there a technique to "slipping in" convoys, such as the old "return to home port" ruse in PacWar? In PacWar it was always much easier to get ships out than in (without the ruse, and if the direction of travel was away from enemy air). Single ships are fine, but you need a lot of them for supply. My late 1940's map has center Singapore 675 land miles from center Saigon, and another late 1940's map indicates that the main airfield was about about 10 miles northwest of center Saigon. That would seem to put Singapore on the very edge of useful Zero range, i.e, if they got there and engaged they might not get home. I have trouble calculating the distance from the WitP screen shots - it's only about 570 miles in a straight line on the screen shot, but they probably cannot fly a straight line if they have to follow the hexes. PI and Rangoon are doing well, but Rangoon is tricky until British air reinforcements begin to trickle in. After that, if you still have Rangoon, you will be in good shape on that side of the map. ( I assume the British Div that was sent to Singapore in Jan is available for defense on that side of the world.) Well it looks like in a couple of months I may be able to run all sorts of diagnostics myself. I am grateful for the work of the testers such as yourself. Yours, Tondern

brisd -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/28/2004 11:47:14 PM)
I've read on another thread that due to the large size of the map, distances between historical locations are not 100% accurate. So the error you see between Singapore and Saigon is probably one of the expected errors. As far as defending Burma and Rangoon, well, Japan took that city probably using less forces than you face and therefore I would suggest fall back to you supply lines and make his longer. You will not be able to regain control of Indian Ocean unless he has use of those forces elsewhere. Personally, I think Japan should have been more aggressive vs CW forces in the Indian theater and look forward to trying out some strategies in WITP.

sven6345789 -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/28/2004 11:57:22 PM)
If the japanese sends his carriers into the indian ocean, there is NOTHING in the british arsenal that comes in their path and lives to tell the tale. Only chance is using the US carriers to put pressure up on the other side (wake?, Suva?), forcing his carriers to react. If he doesn't react, well, Karachi is a nice city in January. Give your naval crews some R n R.

ADavidB -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/29/2004 1:36:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Raverdave Ok I am going to throw this question out to you guys and see what you come up with. How can I stop, circumvent even, Luskan control of the Bay of Bengal ? Using US fleet carriers is out of the question as they are currently on the West coast of the US (and even if I did want to use them I would have to steam all the way across the Pacfic, then under Australia and into the Indian Ocean, and that would be a good month of steaming not allowing to bunkering. The RN has HMS Hermes on hand but with nothing but Gladiators and Swordfish it would be a one sided contest. I have some MRBs but so far they have proved to be uneffective, and without fighter support they bulk at flying a naval attck mission. The fighters that I do have are next to useless, in the form of Hurricanes that simply don't have the legs to carry the battle out to sea, never mind the fact that they have been totally out classed in ari to air fights over land. I need to regain my sea lanes to help support Rangoon and also supply Akyab which will be the next big battle in Burma after Rangoon. I already have an idea as to what I intend to do, but thought it would be fun to see what else your guys come up with. This is a "when the cat's away..." situation that is perfect for you to be "training" your US carrier pilots on live targets in the Central Pacific. The other thing to do is to send some of your better British surface forces via the "southern route" to Western Australia where they can hit-n-run against the DEI. If the Japanese carriers try to follow, you lead them to empty fuel tanks south of Australia. Cheers - Dave Baranyi

Raverdave -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/29/2004 2:13:49 AM)
Nope it is not a "cats away" situation. Luskan is only using two CVLs in the Bay of Bengal..........his big fleet carriers are still loose in the Pacific, where I don't know as I lost track of them about a month ago and they have not been seen since. So I am keeping my CVs close to the west coast incase of trouble.

ADavidB -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/29/2004 2:19:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Raverdave Nope it is not a "cats away" situation. Luskan is only using two CVLs in the Bay of Bengal..........his big fleet carriers are still loose in the Pacific, where I don't know as I lost track of them about a month ago and they have not been seen since. So I am keeping my CVs close to the west coast incase of trouble. Oooh [X(] - only two CVLs are doing that to you? Wow! (Drop back 5 yards and punt...) Dave Baranyi

Raverdave -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/29/2004 2:39:00 AM)
I have had a possitive sighting on two, and suspect that there is a third. It is a bit hard to tell some times as CVs sometimes get reported as CAs by the spotter aircraft.

Luskan -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/29/2004 3:55:51 AM)
So the lesson to all the players out there is although the spotter aircraft are often unreliable, what you need to watch is how many aircraft can a suspected enemy CV TF launch. Bombarded Chandpur again, and got another destroyer smacked. However at least I'm doing more damage than I'm getting. There are plenty of targets in Chandpur and my naval crews (especially on the BBs) are enjoying the gunnery practise. Bringing up more BBs soon. Shoho just came off the production line in Japan. Since I have 3 active CV groups on the map, Shoho will become the flagship of my mobile reserve (another 2 cves and cvls aruond that I can use with her to beef things up a little - I did have to slow production of more than a few big ships to pump out a few more little flat tops). Enjoy - I know Raver didn't. The big thing that will prevent me from continueing the indian ocean siege is that although moulmein produced a little fuel IIRC, the only real fuel dump I have big enough for BBs is back at Singapore. AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 02/06/42 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Naval bombardment of Chandpur, at 30,25 - Coastal Guns Fire Back! Allied aircraft Allied aircraft losses P-40B Tomahawk: 3 destroyed, 4 damaged 21 Coastal gun shots fired in defense. Japanese Ships DD Sawakaze DD Kuroshio DD Kari DD Murakumo DD Shirayuki, Shell hits 1, on fire DD Oyashio DD Isonami DD Hatsushima DD Usugumo DD Fubuki BB Hyuga CL Kitakami BB Ise BB Nagato Allied Ships CL Dauntless, Shell hits 2, heavy damage DD Encounter, Shell hits 1, on fire AK Oregonian, Shell hits 1, heavy damage AK Indora, Shell hits 1 CA Cornwall, Shell hits 2, heavy damage Allied ground losses: 193 casualties reported Guns lost 5 Vehicles lost 1 Airbase hits 1 Airbase supply hits 1 Runway hits 14 Port hits 3 Port fuel hits 4 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Day Air attack on Hanoi , at 36,37 Allied aircraft P-40E Warhawk x 27 no losses Runway hits 3 Aircraft Attacking: 21 x P-40E Warhawk bombing at 2000 feet 3 x P-40E Warhawk bombing at 2000 feet 3 x P-40E Warhawk bombing at 2000 feet -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ground combat at Clark Field Japanese Bombardment attack Attacking force 3888 troops, 123 guns, 0 vehicles Defending force 57775 troops, 658 guns, 216 vehicles Allied ground losses: 285 casualties reported Guns lost 9 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ground combat at Manila Allied Bombardment attack Attacking force 12741 troops, 198 guns, 6 vehicles Defending force 76032 troops, 765 guns, 26 vehicles Japanese ground losses: 35 casualties reported Vehicles lost 1 Allied ground losses: 5 casualties reported -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ground combat at Balikpapan Allied Deliberate attack Attacking force 1583 troops, 36 guns, 0 vehicles Defending force 2324 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles Allied assault odds: 1 to 1 Japanese ground losses: 23 casualties reported Allied ground losses: 64 casualties reported -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ground combat at Clark Field Allied Bombardment attack Attacking force 43405 troops, 612 guns, 6 vehicles Defending force 72142 troops, 401 guns, 312 vehicles Japanese ground losses: 56 casualties reported Guns lost 4 Vehicles lost 1

Capt. Harlock -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/29/2004 4:01:58 AM)
quote: If the japanese sends his carriers into the indian ocean, there is NOTHING in the british arsenal that comes in their path and lives to tell the tale. I can think of two possibilities: 1) underwater attacks, in other words submarines and mines. Naturally, it's a bit too late to lay mines. 2) Transfer a squadron of B-17's around and order them to attack the CVE's. They will probably get no hits, but they may down a number of fighters. (Even the zero was shot down more often than it could shoot down a B-17.) This will either force Luskan to retire, or leave him vulnerable to other LBA.

Wallymanowar -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/29/2004 4:18:17 AM)
My advice would be to abandon the Bay of Bengal to the Japanese and consolidate and protect your Naval assets. Abandon Rangoon and form a defensive line behind the Irrawaddy. Defend your river line as long as possible and then retreat in the north to form a new line along the Chindwin. Defend Akyab for as long as possible - use overland supply as much as possible. Defence of the river lines and the slow travel on the jungle trails should prevent the Japanese from entering India. Holding Akyab should be possible since his supply lines will be stretched as well as yours and you can harass his attempts at naval supply with submarines and mines. In this case the historical course looks like it was the correct choice - in light of Luskan's early capture of Singapore, I am surprised you have held Burma for as long as you have. Only when the USN can force some pressure on the Japs can the British attempt to regain control of the surface and air in Burma.

Raverdave -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/29/2004 5:08:25 AM)
I am torn between holding Rangoon and causing Luskan the loss to time and effort to take it, and seeing my men safe on towards Akyab. If I stay at Rangoon the is no escape route, but if I move Luskan gets Rangoon for free along with the 126,000 fuel that is sitting there. It is a hard call.

norsemanjs -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/29/2004 5:51:58 AM)
I'm sure Luskan would love to move some of his BB's into Rangoon with all that fuel and start running bombardment missions to Akyab, he'll try and pound it to dust. One of the questions you need to ask yourself is: how much do you really save by "bugging out", also what can you truly accomplish by holding on and eventually loosing the entire garrison. It really depends on how well you are situated on setting up a line of defense at the river defence line. If you are starting to build up some force I'd bug out, if not delaying the Japanese advance may be worth the loss of the garrison. An uneviable position all of us who will play the Allies will eventually have to face. Good Luck

Wallymanowar -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/29/2004 6:09:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Raverdave I am torn between holding Rangoon and causing Luskan the loss to time and effort to take it, and seeing my men safe on towards Akyab. If I stay at Rangoon the is no escape route, but if I move Luskan gets Rangoon for free along with the 126,000 fuel that is sitting there. It is a hard call. A tough call. If there is no way to destroy the fuel, is it worth the loss of troops to prevent it from being captured? Retreating leaves you stronger to defend India and if he takes the fuel it means either he will dominate the BoB for a couple more months, or he will be required to ship it out. If he convoys it out you will be afforded the opportunity to harass his shipments with subs and mines. I think the fact that he has more forces in Malaya than historical means that he has more forces available for Burma than historically and your troops in Rangoon are probably lost anyways unless you retreat. This being the case it is more important to perform a fighting withdrawal and strenghthen the line in India than to try to prevent his domination in the BoB. Remember, time is on your side - once the LOC to Australia is secure in the East and the Indian frontier is secure in the west, it is just a matter of attrition until the Allies win. Once he is forced to relocate his naval forces from the BoB and Indian Ocean the RN will be free to harass his sea lanes to Rangoon, and threaten his flank in Burma.

mogami -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/29/2004 6:13:28 AM)
Hi, I don't think it is worth losing troops to protect fuel that will be captured once the troops surrender anyway. Get what bombers you can into range and as soon as the Japanese take Rangoon start bombing the port. Once the CVL have to retire for fuel hit Rangoon with a bombardment TF. (if you can follow the CVL and they go to Rangoon to refuel......)

Luskan -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/29/2004 10:34:30 AM)
Well this last turnw as the quietest in a while - a few enemy planes in china trying to strafe my troops but there just aren't enough of them to do any damage (and there certainly isn't enough chinese support points to worry me). Units in singapore are all not either 99% or 100%. Thrilled at this to say the least. Units in the Northern PI aren't nearly so happy - although my troops on Sulawesi and Mindanao are also looking quiet healthy. As the IJ player you are concious of all your early casualties (especially the ones where your troops are knocked out, rather than destroyed because it is an active pressure to rest and refit your troops). Once I've taken Clark (that should happen in the near future or I'm going to be bloody angry) I'll be able to use my malayan troops for the next offensives, whlie those in the PI recouperate. Running out of HQs - and as a result am having to "disassemble" some of my original big bases and reassemble them (big base forces, engineers for constructiona nd lots of hqs and cds) further south to keep my troops in fighting trim. In retrospect I've probably overdone it at Singapore - but that just means I'll have to move another HQ north or south when the time comes. My operation at Moulmein is complete - the original two divisions that attacked rangoon have been shipped out, while 6 large inf units have been brought in (mixed brigades and regiments) in order to open a much wider front (I could have split the divisions into two groups of three to achieve this, but decided against it. The 55th and the Imperial Guards are my elite, and they will remain as a single striking force). I have left my armoured unit, base force and 2 engineer regiments at moulmein with the 15th Army HQ which will corordinate my offensive into Burma. For the moment, my troops are going to settle in, spit insults at Rangoon, and build up the all important preparation points before they move out. I can't tell you what their objectives are however. The danger about India (or an amphib op along the coast of the bay of Bengal) is that Raver has had two months to move his troops around. I don't know what he has where at the moment, and although such an op would be a huge success if deployed in the right, empty coast city, I don't want to get stuck in a loosing beachhead. For over twow eeks now my slightly superior sized INF unit (small) has been battling it out at balikpapan with three of Raver's units (2 small inf and one base force) in a perfect stalemate. Neither side is able to damage the other, and both sides have the supplies to last out, loosing 60 men a turn over and over. Raver's troops don't have any guns, but my 26 guns there aren't really maknig a big enough impact, so i've detailed a few brand new units into the fray from Japan. I also had a four or six VN divisions appear this turn, and although I had already established my line of defence and communication with more than enough jap troops (too many to be honest) they are being committed to the defenses there as well. I was sort of Hoping Raver would try a lunge north of hanoi (meaning inland) and had troops there ready so cut off and destroy any chinese incursion, but Raver didn't do as I had wanted. In china things have gone very very quiet on the gronud. A couple of Raver's left over units are trapped behind my lines, outnumbered hundreds to one out in the wildnerness - they won't be around long, and finally my front has resolved into a proper, equally defended line (instead of 3 massive armies with massive 200 mile gaps in the front line). This line is being serviced by some nearby HQs that aren't quite replenishing my losses fast enough - so I'm tempted to ship in a few more from less vital areas. Once these troops are in fighting trim, we'll see about slowly moving my line forward to test Raver's defences (fortunately I know he doesn't have anywhere near the kind of logistical support for his troops that I do. I know I can recouperate faster than his chinese can at this stage). Also, Raver has been quite stubborn in leaving Suva alone. Disappointing again. Seems that I should have gone for Noumea and Darwin first, rather than later and FORCED him to react with something. Disappointing news (if indeed it is true) that his CVs are on the west coast - wouldn't be surprised if they were headed under Oz over to fight in the Indian ocean - although Raver wouldn't risk them in the confined waters north of Darwin or near Rabaul. I think my tactics of trying to get Raver to react with his CVs were good in theory - but just too early. He's probably got all those CVs holed up somewhere upgrading thier AA guns, filling out the wildcats (training the pilots as people have been suggesting) and of course, getting some big BBs fixed and repaired to act as AA platforms for his future TFs. My sigint revealed a few interesting hints this turn (hasn't been useful so far, but it might just have paid off) and I have dispatched my banana (bananaint?) to investigate.

Raverdave -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/29/2004 11:29:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mogami Hi, I don't think it is worth losing troops to protect fuel that will be captured once the troops surrender anyway. Get what bombers you can into range and as soon as the Japanese take Rangoon start bombing the port. Once the CVL have to retire for fuel hit Rangoon with a bombardment TF. (if you can follow the CVL and they go to Rangoon to refuel......) Yeah I was thinking of that but Luskan has at least 4 BBs in the area, so he is covering everything rather well at this point. I tend to agree about the troops in Rangoon, I am inclinded to save the men and let the place fall into Luskan's little yellow hands.

Luskan -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/29/2004 12:32:10 PM)
Another turn, and I tested the defences at Tugeragao once more and got bruised there - that INF division there is pretty beaten up. Fortunately I'll be adding the requivalent of another division plus a hoard of engineers there to clean that mess up as soon as possible (and I think that place has been getting supplied from Manila to Clark to Tugeragao - so I've moved to sever the possible supply line - foolish of me not to do this first. I assumed that my troops at clark would suffice, but since I don't control that hex . . . Once I've dealt with the Defenders at Tugeragao (starved or otherwise) I'll be moving my engineer army (along with the left over INFs) to try and fix Clark once and for all. My additional troops at Manila have arrived, and I now have over a ten to one advantage in troops, and about 6 to one in guns, and about 300 to 0 in tanks. Hopefully it will be enough to bombard the crap out of the place while my preparation points increase.

Raverdave -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/29/2004 3:09:44 PM)
Luskan is in for a few interesting turns. I have had some plans brewing for the last few weeks and they are about to bear fruit ! I will peel that bananana if it is the last thing I do !

Luskan -> RE: Singapore and Rangoon (5/29/2004 4:06:18 PM)
Well, too late! By thinking with my banana, I was able to beat Raver to the punch [:D] My reinforcements (which only just arrived in manila after their rushed two weeks of preparation and planning points) of several DIVISIONS at Manila launched a costly shock attack that took them over the walls of the enemy fortress and sent Raver's troops (and Macarthur himself I think) scampering over to Lambon bay - where they are majorly cut off from Clark (well, by road and rail they are - but they aren't cut off over the countryside being an adjacent hex and all). My quick thinking armoured commanders were set to pursue the enemy and chased them over to Lambon bay as well (so now my two tank regiments are already there, harassing them). Manila is mine, and due to the spped with which it fell (shock attakc not deliberate) the place isn't messed up that bad. There are 13000 resource points here that Raver didn't evac (not as many as I would have liked) and now my supply situation on the entire island has gone from bad to quickly improving (Manila will be generating supplies for all my troops, and the HQs there will be adding a very few replacements as they are very small HQs). With this victory I can catch Raver's troops at Clark in a big pincer movement (although I still ahve to hit Tugeragao first) and crush them - hopefully before the remnants from manila join forces with him there. A quick tip for the WITP players who haven't seen the game yet (soon though!): Should Raver run for Bataan? Probably. Once troops are defeated and forced to retreat, they loose much morale and combat effectiveness. So in game terms, if Raver moves his troops to Bataan, they'll be in fighting trim there, but if I kick them out of Clark and they retreat to Bataan - well Bataan will fall very quickly because I won't give him the time (and he won't have the supplies and HQs) to replenish combat effectiveness. This is another reason singapore fell so quick (I'd kicked his troops the length of malaysia - they had so much southeasterly momentum that they skidded right past singapore into the sea! Same with his chinese in China. Once routed troops need hqs, supply and TIME to regenerate to the point that they can resist again. This is the reason Iw as unwilling to continue the stalemate at Rangoon - if I had eventually lost (unlikely) since I didn't have any real firepower in Indochina Raver could have used his inferior forces to roll my superior, yet routing forces up like a carpet all the way to Hanoi. I withdrew, and then sent in lots of INF units to secure the place. The allied sub feeding frenzy continues in this turn. Also, Raver has obviously gathered as many chinese as he can under one banner (those troops that haven't been shattered in the chinese front already), and marched them down to Hanoi as I had initially hoped (my depression last turn was 1 turn premature). I haven't been idle, there is a little fort at Hanoi, and more than a few INF units - best of all I have 3 fairly fresh divisions at nanning that will be cutting these guys off from the rail link to cenrtal china fairly soon - meaning they'll have to be supplied along the jungle trails - never a good idea. Looks like my new VN troops are going to get their mettle tested! Four of my bigger bbs made a run past the DEI in the last few turns, and Raver's LBA had many, many goes at them, to absolutely no effect (aside from thinning out their own numbers). Also, my 2 weeks grounding of all air units not on ASW duty (and not in china!) has come to an end. All my units are refreshed and at full strength. Many of them ahve been rotated onto training and I spent about 50 minutes redistributing my air assets more evenly across my -erm - the emperor's realm. Enjoy! AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 02/09/42 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sub attack at 32,56 Japanese Ships TK Akane Maru, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage PC Takunan Maru #10 MSW Chitose maru Allied Ships SS S-38 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sub attack at 68,44 Japanese Ships TK Ogura Maru #3, Torpedo hits 1, on fire PC Gamitsu Maru #1 MSW W.19 Allied Ships SS Plunger -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sub attack at 43,49 Japanese Ships APD APD-31, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage MSW W.3 Allied Ships SS O21 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Day Air attack on TF at 23,59 Allied aircraft Brewster 339D x 9 Martin 139 x 21 Allied aircraft losses Martin 139: 9 damaged Japanese Ships BB Hiei BB Kongo BB Kirishima CA Atago Aircraft Attacking: 3 x Martin 139 bombing at 6000 feet 3 x Martin 139 bombing at 6000 feet 3 x Martin 139 bombing at 6000 feet 4 x Martin 139 bombing at 6000 feet 3 x Martin 139 bombing at 6000 feet 3 x Martin 139 bombing at 6000 feet 2 x Martin 139 bombing at 6000 feet -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Day Air attack on TF at 23,59 Allied aircraft Martin 139 x 6 Allied aircraft losses Martin 139: 1 damaged Japanese Ships BB Kongo BB Kirishima Aircraft Attacking: 3 x Martin 139 bombing at 15000 feet 3 x Martin 139 bombing at 15000 feet -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Day Air attack on TF at 23,59 Allied aircraft T.IVa x 2 Allied aircraft losses T.IVa: 1 damaged Japanese Ships BB Kongo Aircraft Attacking: 2 x T.IVa bombing at 5000 feet -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Day Air attack on TF at 23,59 Allied aircraft Martin 139 x 3 Allied aircraft losses Martin 139: 1 damaged Japanese Ships BB Hiei Aircraft Attacking: 3 x Martin 139 bombing at 15000 feet -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ground combat at Manila Japanese Shock attack Attacking force 138113 troops, 1461 guns, 152 vehicles Defending force 19587 troops, 239 guns, 18 vehicles Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 0 Japanese assault odds: 2 to 1 (fort level 0) Japanese forces CAPTURE Manila base !!! Japanese ground losses: 3622 casualties reported Guns lost 55 Vehicles lost 6 Allied ground losses: 1701 casualties reported Guns lost 61 Vehicles lost 3 Defeated Allied Units Retreating! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ground combat at Clark Field Japanese Bombardment attack Attacking force 3888 troops, 121 guns, 0 vehicles Defending force 57724 troops, 657 guns, 222 vehicles Allied ground losses: 120 casualties reported Guns lost 4 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ground combat at Balikpapan Allied Deliberate attack Attacking force 1442 troops, 32 guns, 0 vehicles Defending force 2014 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles Allied assault odds: 1 to 1 Japanese ground losses: 114 casualties reported Allied ground losses: 24 casualties reported -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ground combat at Clark Field Allied Bombardment attack Attacking force 43580 troops, 618 guns, 6 vehicles Defending force 72411 troops, 390 guns, 306 vehicles Japanese ground losses: 131 casualties reported Guns lost 2 Vehicles lost 3 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ground combat at Lamon Bay Allied Bombardment attack Attacking force 6190 troops, 98 guns, 0 vehicles Defending force 1569 troops, 0 guns, 97 vehicles

kfmiller41 -> RE: An Aussie Beta Affair - Luskan V Raver!!! (5/30/2004 3:04:35 AM)
Hello all, I dont often post (being a troll who just reads the boards) but I just wanted to agree with an earlier poster that this is a game, not a simulator. I plan on buying it as soon as it comes out but also knowing that playing as the Japenese side I will never expect to win the way people who fight a war expect to, by beating the other side. It just wasnt militarily possible for Japan to defeat the USA. That doesnt mean it wont be fun to try, and because this is a game I see no reason why there cant be options to make the game more competitive. Will they be historical? No but if I wanted exact history i will read a book[:D]. From what I have read in the AARs WITP will be loads of fun and anything that makes the game fun and competitive and reasonably historical gets a hurrah from me. Also wanted to thank the playtesters for all the hard work playing and writing of these AARs[&o]

Page: << < prev 15 16 [17] 18 19 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.859375