RE: Future Allied attack paths.

RE: Future Allied attack paths. (Full Version)

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

Message

veji1 -> RE: Future Allied attack paths. (6/20/2006 7:46:34 PM)
well... There was the ;) though.... An anyway if I were the Japs I'd be happy to have 4/3 of the CEA.....:)

Sneer -> RE: convoy intercepted (6/20/2006 8:04:59 PM)
it is easy i have 25-30 big units that are not used for garrison duties in china i think 6-8 units will go sooner or later i need to move 10 to india/burma - i estimate that 15 division as long as covered from air and with strong tank component will be ok - 5 division will be from burma army - tanks from southern army about 6-8 will be needed to reinforce coastal cities - these one will be taken from reinforcements i think that southern army - majority + 3-4 ex- chinase div will be enough for pacific + dei especially 4th fleet will get equivalent of 3-4 big units - many of them soon - it will be over 20 big units total ( from memory) 15-20 divsions left 1-2 to kuriles - it is possible that these units will be taken from home Isl up to 5 as strategic reserve and rest to russia it means some 5k AV + kwantung will get quite a lot of new units - question is if I have enough equipment in pools to fill them but i think answer is positive i would not be surprised if i will have 15k AV in fresh units and next 5K in forming up ones - behind lvl 9 forts they should stand as long as supplied it is air power about which i'm worried number of units and vastness of russian pools means i will be unable to cover this front from air so LCU will not be a problem

Sneer -> RE: Future Allied attack paths. (6/20/2006 8:07:17 PM)
it is how i see next 6 moths red - certain fight of high intesivity and most probable enemy assault axis yellow - risk areas where surprise attack is possible and where mostly fleet is expected to maintain security [image]local://upfiles/10540/08BC414E3D514190A0244D90B5E59B09.jpg[/image]

BrucePowers -> RE: Future Allied attack paths. (6/21/2006 1:13:25 AM)
Raver can very very tricky.

Raverdave -> RE: Future Allied attack paths. (6/21/2006 6:04:23 AM)
Apart from India....Sneer has it mostly right. The British army will not be in anyway ready to go toe-to-toe until at least mid'44. Untill then it is going to be airwarfare. I want to try and make him bleed aircraft and pilots over India....but that will not happen until I get better fighters with longer range.

Raverdave -> RE: Future Allied attack paths. (6/21/2006 6:07:59 AM)
Sneer and I did very well last night with 10 turns done over 7 hours[8D]. We hope to try and do the same again tonight.

veji1 -> RE: Future Allied attack paths. (6/21/2006 10:40:50 AM)
well this is good, but we need a proof to believe you, hence 7 combat reports are to be posted very soon.

Sneer -> RE: Future Allied attack paths. (6/21/2006 10:50:07 AM)
nothing really happen usual japanese helens over chungking and allied 4e over timor some subs moving logistics building up R&D factories raising HI (to15.5k) repair shipyard visiting - Hiyo finished upgrade - 2 months ago this ship had 38 sys dmg planning sth nasty for Raverdave - i need to be always one step ahead of him if i want to surprise him and catch some of his assets 1st action of night fighters over jamshedpur - no result hard thinking why my LCU at chungking are always few points of suppliue below their req.

veji1 -> RE: Future Allied attack paths. (6/21/2006 11:14:36 AM)
Actually, i have never been far away in game to know what to do with them... What's the use of the Irving, the Randy, the KAI Dinah etc ? I guess you can use them to defend bases behind the front line ? Are they good against B29 for instances ?

Sneer -> RE: Future Allied attack paths. (6/21/2006 11:40:47 AM)
we are far from B29 at this moment i have ki45 introduced - FB and NF version but not many planes in service - there is no possibility to upgrade fighter sqn to them so 2 NF and 1NF sqn at the moment NF are in need as Raverdave do not want to see my fighters in daylight and found 4e losses too high in normal action FB - I don't find big use of ki 45 FB - if they had bigger range they would be nice killers of smaller ships - barges ,Pts etc but with current there is little to do Randy is a plane from 44 so long time to go , kai dinah i think too soon i will have Irving as night fighter - daitai is organising currently - its effectivness will be checked soon there are quite a lot of them in reinforcements - unfortunately it is navy plane so no ability to streamline production with army ki 45 from new planes Jacks are great - it is best JAF fighter and i can send them easily against p 38 george is 8 months away and zeke 5 months away i don't remeber when franks are expected but i think early 44 too so no revolution - old toys

Raverdave -> RE: Future Allied attack paths. (6/21/2006 12:18:16 PM)
I have nodoubt that Sneer is planning something nasty......a spoiling attack against Noumea or in that area is the most logical point to hit. Most other places I am well covered by my air umbrella. He could also try a raid on the Aussie northeast coast....but there is not much there to be had. Hitting one of the remote aussie towns such as Durby or Broome might be interesting. Either way I feel that I am ready for him. This last month has shown that Sneer does not like being on the defensive, and as the IJN player if he sticks his neck out too far at this stage of the game he will get it lopped off.

veji1 -> RE: Future Allied attack paths. (6/21/2006 12:20:12 PM)
Regarding B29, i Meant that maybe from experience you knew if NF and FB where efficient against them, even though in this specific game they are quite far away... Are these planes any good against unescorted bombers on rear bases ? I know the fact that this is a joint AAR prevents you from giving to much info away, but concerning your airforce, how do you plan on working ? keeping lots of frontline units, or rather using frontline units as a picket line and having second echelon concentrations ready to be brought forward when it heats up ?

Sneer -> RE: Future Allied attack paths. (6/21/2006 12:31:55 PM)
whole southern Pac is like allied highway i get so many info about shipping that i'm confused what to do veiji1 - no more unescorted bombers going to rear bases :-) - it was too painful to Raverdave as far as my statement about Jacks Raverdave checked forum and decide to test it at Asanol AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 04/15/43 Day Air attack on Asansol , at 31,21 Japanese aircraft J2M Jack x 19 Ki-44-IIb Tojo x 62 Allied aircraft P-38G Lightning x 62 Japanese aircraft losses J2M Jack: 2 destroyed Ki-44-IIb Tojo: 9 destroyed, 3 damaged Allied aircraft losses P-38G Lightning: 29 destroyed, 4 damaged nothing to comment

veji1 -> RE: Future Allied attack paths. (6/21/2006 12:38:23 PM)
Looks like he is building there exp the hard way : Send 70 pilots with 50 exp in harms way, 35 come back with exp 55... Rinse and repeat until you get a unit with a good core of high exp pilots... Thing is this training method is frame and pilot consuming :)

Sneer -> RE: Future Allied attack paths. (6/21/2006 12:42:31 PM)
as far as stickig head too far light forces duties is small combat action and enemy harassment if enemy moves unguarded and light forces are not active it is close to war crime also bigger units need to be seen and relocate - this way enemy must spend time and fear + never know where fleet main body stays during last month i had KB split to 3 TFs staying in diffrent places. does it mean it is a risk - yes - but my enemy fear combined KB so no active partols from him what if he try to catch me ?- :-) he never knows when it will be combined again similar with bigger units reading PZB AAR shows that 44 will be a year of limited options Allied player gains strenght fast and i can't really hurt him at this stage of war - not unless i want to atritt myself too and losses 1:1 are real defeat to me i need to gain 2:1 to say that everything works fine my fleet is strong and this�opened possibilities to me i have strong doubts if Raverdave would be able to hold a CENPAC base taken by surprise if i decide to press it with my fleet and reserves i'm focused currently on building stockpiles of fuel in critical locations� looks like last 3-5 months fleet action resulted in net balance of sth like -800k of fuel i can keep activity but it would lower it to critical levels within 6 month - time when allied fleet will raise heads again BTW if allied moved too fast and put their head too far - like it was few months ago it will be cut too [:D]

Raverdave -> RE: Future Allied attack paths. (6/21/2006 12:59:50 PM)
I lost 20 not 29 P-38s. Exp now upto 63 from 61.

veji1 -> RE: Future Allied attack paths. (6/21/2006 12:59:59 PM)
Boy, PZB's AAR really is full of lessons for late jap players, the way he involved KB too early, depriving himself of a hammer with which he could have caught allies blocked by steep resistance in one of their invasions... Main use of KB in late war is to force allies to commit fully to one offensive, because they cannot risk facing KB without being properly covered... Then as we've seen in PZB's AAR, force the allies to keep their navy concentrated, and fight for small victories around there main force, attacking convoys, escorts, and all the logistic line behind the main push... An be patient and wait for the one or two occasion were you'll have a chance to strike at his fleet when low on ordinance or after his done a mistake, or after he's been tricked by decoy CVEs or something like this... Even though most of PZBs attempts were foiled, you learn so many nasty tricks from his AAR that you can apply later on...

Sneer -> RE: Future Allied attack paths. (6/21/2006 1:01:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Raverdave I lost 20 not 29 P-38s.� Exp now upto 63 from 61.� 29 were in air losses report - as far as I remember but can be wrong

Sneer -> RE: Future Allied attack paths. (6/21/2006 1:03:41 PM)
options are limited in 44 fleet in being is best of them but can't be played as only one otherwise it will loose its value

veji1 -> RE: Future Allied attack paths. (6/21/2006 1:20:47 PM)
well actually options in 1944 are illimited me thinks, it is just that all you do will only bring tiny results, so you actually have to try to achieve them committing the lest forces that you can... ie better to sink 2DDs and 4AKs with a light surface group than with the whole KB... In a way I guess operating lone CVs and CVLs in small TFS for buccaneering purposes behind his lines is a good way to go, it will force him to create bigger convoys, to assign part of his CVEs and CVLs to these... I meen using the 53 planes CVs and the CVLs this way is better then using them as meat fodders... The only problem will be the lack of escorts... I hope you haven't lost too many of them... And with 1.801 Subs are really going to be a tool in your defensive strategy, as PZB's AAR showed, Putting a fish in a BB or a CV during one big allied invasion can create an awfull mess for the allies from which you can take advantage... I guess the whole thing is to keep trying sneaky low cost attacks to try to disrupt his effort, and if and once you manage to mess his plans a bit, hit where it hurts... And run away...

Sneer -> RE: Future Allied attack paths. (6/21/2006 2:19:27 PM)
subs must fight hard to survive but to some extent it is true - my sub program is next after carriers

Sneer -> corsairs and punishment (6/21/2006 5:08:01 PM)
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 04/19/43 i decided to harass luganville light forces and 2 carriers were assigned planes got into corsair circus and 20 of them were lost they were of lowest exp in the fleet ( 64) but had best planes - zekes looks like allied bases are magically protected good my planes noticed swarms of PT boats so I recalled my light forces slightly irritating that so small strike went divided Day Air attack on TF, near Luganville at 72,107 Japanese aircraft A6M5 Zeke x 8 D4Y Judy x 26 A6M3a Zero x 9 B5N Kate x 24 Allied aircraft F4U-1 Corsair x 15 Japanese aircraft losses A6M5 Zeke: 5 destroyed D4Y Judy: 3 destroyed, 1 damaged A6M3a Zero: 3 destroyed B5N Kate: 5 destroyed Allied Ships AK Dashing Wave, Bomb hits 2, on fire AK Herstein, Bomb hits 1 AK Dukat AK Proteus, Bomb hits 2, on fire AK Hřegh Merchant AK Vitorlock AK William Williams AK Liberty ----------------------------------------------- Day Air attack on TF, near Luganville at 72,107 Japanese aircraft A6M3a Zero x 8 B5N Kate x 14 Allied aircraft F4U-1 Corsair x 17 Japanese aircraft losses A6M3a Zero: 4 destroyed B5N Kate: 3 destroyed Allied Ships AK Algorab AK Mabella [image]local://upfiles/10540/93D93087C8EE4B7D98310AC7A56870FA.jpg[/image]

veji1 -> RE: Future Allied attack paths.corsairs and punishment (6/21/2006 5:14:27 PM)
this 55 PTs there !!!! Is this a lunacy game or do you have house rules ? Because this seems a wee bit excessive to me... I mean I don't know what happened in history, but I guess there were less than that... Well You have reached a date where you can't port attack anymore with your planes, except with enormous numerical superiority... You have to settle with attacking ships at sea.. Anyway, this is really like an army of ants...

Sneer -> RE: Future Allied attack paths.corsairs and punishment (6/21/2006 5:19:14 PM)
turning point ? maybe to early and too small ........but sth really changes ... I feel it in the air hopefully i still have some nice ideas to do

Raverdave -> RE: Future Allied attack paths.corsairs and punishment (6/21/2006 5:23:05 PM)
Yes the change has come..................it is your doom.

Sneer -> I hate PTs (6/21/2006 7:34:17 PM)
there is no diffrence for PTs what the sea state is PT are always on station like in Andy vs PZB they will guard every port like much bigger ships with todays record i killed total of 40 PTs AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 04/20/43 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Night Air attack on Chandpur , at 30,25 Allied aircraft B-24D Liberator x 15 Allied aircraft losses B-24D Liberator: 6 damaged Aircraft Attacking: 15 x B-24D Liberator bombing at 10000 feet -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Night Air attack on Diamond Harbor , at 28,23 Japanese aircraft Ki-45 KAIa Nick x 26 Allied aircraft Beaufighter VIC x 4 No Japanese losses Allied aircraft losses Beaufighter VIC: 1 damaged Aircraft Attacking: 4 x Beaufighter VIC bombing at 2000 feet -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Night Air attack on Calcutta , at 29,23 Japanese aircraft Ki-45 KAIa Nick x 19 Allied aircraft Beaufighter VIF x 5 Wellington III x 28 Liberator VI x 6 B-25C Mitchell x 20 Japanese aircraft losses No Japanese losses Allied aircraft losses Wellington III: 1 damaged Airbase hits 1 Runway hits 2 Aircraft Attacking: 3 x Wellington III bombing at 10000 feet 4 x Wellington III bombing at 10000 feet 3 x Wellington III bombing at 10000 feet 6 x Wellington III bombing at 10000 feet 6 x Wellington III bombing at 10000 feet 6 x Liberator VI bombing at 10000 feet 3 x Wellington III bombing at 10000 feet 5 x Beaufighter VIF bombing at 2000 feet 3 x Wellington III bombing at 10000 feet 20 x B-25C Mitchell bombing at 10000 feet -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Night Time Surface Combat, near Tenimbar at 36,81 Japanese Ships CL Isuzu DD Shiratsuyu, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage DD Shigure, Shell hits 1, on fire DD Murasame DD Yudachi DD Samidare DD Yamakaze DD Hatsushima DD Wakaba DD Yugure DD Ariake DD Fubuki DD Kasasagi DD Hayabusa Allied Ships PT PT-103 PT PT-105, Shell hits 1, and is sunk PT PT-106, Shell hits 5, and is sunk PT PT-108 PT PT-236, Shell hits 1, and is sunk PT PT-241, Shell hits 2, and is sunk PT PT-243 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Night Time Surface Combat, near Tenimbar at 36,81 Japanese Ships CL Isuzu DD Shiratsuyu, Shell hits 1, on fire, heavy damage DD Shigure, on fire DD Murasame DD Yudachi DD Samidare DD Yamakaze DD Hatsushima DD Wakaba DD Yugure DD Ariake DD Fubuki DD Kasasagi DD Hayabusa Allied Ships PT PT-111, Shell hits 10, and is sunk PT PT-113, Shell hits 9, and is sunk Day Air attack on TF at 36,79 Allied aircraft Kittyhawk I x 4 Beaufighter Mk 21 x 15 P-40E Warhawk x 13 No Allied losses Japanese Ships DD Shiratsuyu, on fire, heavy damage Aircraft Attacking: 1 x Beaufighter Mk 21 bombing at 2000 feet 2 x Beaufighter Mk 21 bombing at 2000 feet 4 x Beaufighter Mk 21 bombing at 2000 feet 4 x Beaufighter Mk 21 bombing at 2000 feet 4 x Beaufighter Mk 21 bombing at 2000 feet -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sub attack at 36,79 Allied Ships SS Argonaut

veji1 -> RE: I hate PTs (6/21/2006 8:14:57 PM)
yeah but 55 of them for one port is a lot !!! Shouldn't there be a limit in house rules, sort of like : port 1-3 : 1 tf of 10 port 4-6 : 2 tfs of 10 Port 6-9 : 3 tfs of 10 ?

castor troy -> RE: I hate PTs (6/21/2006 8:21:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: veji1 yeah but 55 of them for one port is a lot !!! Shouldn't there be a limit in house rules, sort of like : port 1-3 : 1 tf of 10 port 4-6 : 2 tfs of 10 Port 6-9 : 3 tfs of 10 ? As long as there is this bug (out of sync) that force you not to strafe PTs there should be a house rule with numbers far lower. Unfortunately I don�t have a house rule on that in any of my PBEMs.[8\|]

Sneer -> RE: I hate PTs (6/21/2006 10:25:03 PM)
they were more numerous in the area as 3 sunk on old mines and at least 5-6 were sunk by strafing fighters from my carriers 2 weaks ago plus there are many PTs in Nomuea + they guard Darwin from my capitals All my info about PT is that they were low reliability weapon - very sensitive on sea state- often it was very difficult for them to get to good launch position in Witp they almost always shoot torpedos and with such numbers they always hit sth Apart from smallest MSW there is no spare ship type to fight with them as even small PC type are hit often I know PTs were used in Salomons but I can't remember them doing harm to Japan Navy also in Surigato strait they achieved suprisingly low at least comparing to opprotunities and their number strange situation - i don't fear enemy surface TF because i know i can inflict losses to allies but almost all combat with PT is loose situation. so with hundreds of US PT boats number of night raids will go down dramaticly - looks like we will go back to boring turns from late 42.

Ron Saueracker -> RE: I hate PTs (6/21/2006 10:52:17 PM)
Don't worry about the sync bug as it only effects the Allied players combat replay. Strafe the crap out of them but send a copy of your combat report. If he does not like it tell him to complain to the guy responsible for bugging the program.[:D]

Page: << < prev 29 30 [31] 32 33 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.65625