RE: Battle of the Banda Sea

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

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

Page: << < prev 24 25 [26] 27 28 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/15/2010 11:03:37 AM

LoBaron

Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

Fishbed I have to again echo witpqs. Same applies to me.

For sure we are on safe ground discussing this from outside the game without the emotion
caused by a brutal result of a well planned engagement.

But I guess we all know the feeling of getting whacked in game already. (maybe there are some exceptions
but I�m not, thats for sure).

I�m just more the stubborn type.
If I cannot REALLY trace a lopsided result back to a bug (not sure but we probably both agree that�this not a bug
but a combination of risk taken, luck running out and the fact that theres no specially implemented game mechanic for
this specific situation except for a general one that we all know of) I�d pay the price and go on.

Edit: edited SClomblination to look more like combination

< Message edited by LoBaron -- 2/15/2010 11:11:01 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Fishbed)

Post #: 751

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/15/2010 2:31:18 PM

princep01

Posts: 943
Joined: 8/7/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline

I agree with LoBaron and witpqs. If it were me playing either side, there would be no redo. Any "redo" would come in the form of a new game. Cuttlefish made a calculated, but serious mistake in moving those CVs south of Ambon into very restricted waters. He was unfortunate in the outcome, but the mistake was his.

What transpired is entirely realistic and believable. It is not the result of some bug induced lunacy. Hence, live with it and either play the game out to its likely end or start a new one. The writing skills of the combatants have not been dimished. Neither have their respctive playing skills (if anything, they have been more finely honed). I'd love to see a rematch with acompanying AAR. This game is decided. A rematch would allow both players to start fresh with the knowledge they learned from this grand contest.

(in reply to LoBaron)

Post #: 752

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/15/2010 2:44:43 PM

LoBaron

Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: princep01
I'd love to see a rematch with acompanying AAR. This game is decided. A rematch would allow both players to start fresh with the knowledge they learned from this grand contest.

If you say that the game is decided, then 95% of the games here are - exactly on Dec 7th 1941.

Cuttlefish can still be a sting in the side of Q-balls advance. And if he is patient enough...there are always options.
Yes, the outcome is decided. Still it would be interesting to see how long he can delay the final blow. Thats the motivation for the Japanese
side in the first place when the tide turns.

_____________________________

(in reply to princep01)

Post #: 753

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/15/2010 3:11:46 PM

PaxMondo

Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

Like most everyone else, I've read both sides here, and my first conclusion is: "Wow, this game really does do a heck of a good job of simulating the realities of WWII Pac."

I think it also reinforces what I've long known and will REALLY have to keep in mind in my own games. The result here is so eerily close to the actual result, and played by two experts.

1. The JAP success is based upon audacity and risk management.
2. The Allies buildup through '42 is significant. From July '42 beware.

Looking at the AAR, it's really great, and moreover, its played without the political impacts and it still ends up at a near historical result. IRL, the US invades Guadacanal in Aug '42 more on political than military goals. They HAVE to have some success or risk losing support at home. As several people correctly state, DEI is strategically far more important than the Solomons. But in Aug '42, the allies can't do DEI. They can do Solomons (barely) and so do. Q-Ball though is more patient, methodically assembles his forces and strikes at the DEI. Strategically, very much on point IMHO.

My takeaway's from this AAR as JAP:
1. You've got to keep accurate estimates of allied strength and factor that into your planning.
2. Isolating OZ is even more important in the game than IRL. It poses too much risk to DEI and without the real life political interference, players will come north much sooner and more forcefully.

As Allies:
1. Methodical build up will (always) work.
2. Let JAP take the risks. There is little/no upside for the Allies.
3. Do not allow OZ to be isolated. Everything else is negotiable. :)

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to LoBaron)

Post #: 754

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/15/2010 3:16:55 PM

princep01

Posts: 943
Joined: 8/7/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline

Actually, I have to disagree. This game is "won" on points. The Japanese can win the game via an auto victory (i.e. 4-1 after 42) or by holding out to prevent the Allied victory point levels. The Japanese "win" many more than 5% of all games by those measures. The winner is NOT decide on Dec. 7. However, in my humble opinion, cuttlefish has no chance in this game of winning at all. Yes, it is possible, he can extend this one a bit longer (although I do not personnally think so for reasons cited earlier). The Allies might walk into a well designed trap and all that....but, not likely.

The simple fact is that Q-Ball will retard oil supplies within 3-4 months and cut it off almost entirely in 6-7 months. Japanese industry withers accordingly and the military end follows very quickly.

The players are free as the wind to decide whether to go forth, redo or start anew. I'd vote for the latter. However, there is little doubt in my mind for whither this game goes. The end is clearly in sight. Let us be smarter than the Emperor and sue for peace before the HI are a burned out shell and his people suffer untold horrors.

(in reply to LoBaron)

Post #: 755

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/15/2010 3:26:56 PM

LoBaron

Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

With a decent opponent auto-victory is much harder to achieve than in stock.
There are a couple of AAR�s where the strategical map is blood red down to mid-OZ and its just not enough.
If you find the first Japanes AV against an at least medium experienced Allied player please let me know, I will be an
avid reader of his AAR.

That said ill stick to my 5% rate for now.

Both, Q-ball and Cuttlefish, can still learn much�by going on. End-game experience is valuable and rare.

_____________________________

(in reply to princep01)

Post #: 756

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/15/2010 3:29:54 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

I agree. Soldier on. It's only fair for the Allies to get to use the uncoiled arsenal that they've had to build patiently over the last year of game time.

_____________________________

(in reply to LoBaron)

Post #: 757

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/15/2010 10:13:22 PM

Rob Brennan UK

Posts: 3685
Joined: 8/24/2002
From: London UK
Status: offline

WOW , amazing AAR , just caught up on a reccomendation from Admiral Fujita LoBaron

. and very interesting discussion. In Q-Balls place i would offer a re-do, just to keep the game more balanced (its still pretty early after all) , that said however cuttlefish most likely wouldn't take it (i havnt read his side yet) as he seems like a fair player. on a historical note yes its eerily like you know where :).

I'm not critisizing Q-ball in any way and really applaud his positioning and use of all avalable assets to force a showdown at a time and place of his choosing.

Just as an obervation about the game overall, it seems to me that going for the DEI as an allied priority does doom japan to an earlier demise as losing the DEI oil will kill Japan off in a few months. I have no problem with this strategy and its one i used in WitP sucessfully (albeit i did it in reverse and went south from sabang in sumatra). I am however toying with the idea of playing allies and deliberately not trying to annialate japans economy in 42. SE-Asia is fair game as are raids from Darwin, but mainly go semi historical to keep the game going longer so both sides get to play with new toys later in the war.

Just thinking out loud here.

Great game Q-Ball and well played , i hope i have as much fun when i start GC PBEM. Still having a whale of time with the scenarios atm though.

Thank you for taking the time to post and keep us public entertained.

_____________________________

sorry for the spelling . English is my main language , I just can't type . and i'm too lazy to edit :)

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 758

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/15/2010 10:29:53 PM

Smeulders

Posts: 1879
Joined: 8/9/2009
Status: offline

I'm guessing that feats like this will be harder to replicate for later allied players. This and other PBEMs are showing the vulnerability to an offensive from Darwin and I think that Japanese players will now either reinforce this area heavily or go further and capture Northern Australia as a buffer. That said, this offensive by Q-ball deserves this victory, he saw a weakness, exploited it and created the situation that led to this carrier battle.

(in reply to Rob Brennan UK)

Post #: 759

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/16/2010 3:50:06 AM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

Great comments guys! I completely agree on the DEI; it is the soft underbelly of the Empire. If I am Japan, I would add Darwin and the North Coast of OZ to the must-take list. On the bright side, if you move early enough (i.e. Feb/mar), it shouldn't be too difficult.

As far as VPs go, I think that it is nearly impossible for the Japanese to win on VPs in AE, if the two opponents are even remotely evenly matched. It was very difficult in WITP; I played a 2x2 where we overran almost all of India, all of New Zealand, Northern Australia, most of the Aleutians, sank several CVs.....and it was going to be close on auto-victory. I will be interested to see, but I bet hardly any Japanese players will win from a VP-standpoint.

At any rate, the Allies will win this game because the Allies always do, so it's a matter of how quick or what happens along the way.

Combat Report, Jan 14, 1942

Battle of the Banda Sea: Today was the wrap-up phase; several IJN cripples were caught and sunk, including Hiei (which ate 26 bombs in addition to the pounding it took yesterday), and CAs Suzuya, Takao, and Chokai. That brings the total to at least 4 CV, 2 BB, and 4 CA, and Fuso, if not sunk, was certainly handled rudely.

We lost HMS Hermes, Cophaee, CA Hawkins, and 2 DD. I will be without the services of most of the RN BBs for awhile; Valiant and Warspite have been recalled to London, and only Revenge and Repulse remain operational, with all other BBs reparing some level of damage. This will put a dent into my surface forces in the DEI, though I am transferring at least 4 USN BBs into the area to compensate; probably 2 Idahos and 2 Fast BBs.

Plans: I expect it to be quiet for a few turns, until I get the Luganville and Kendari invasions loaded and on the way. These are the next targets. The IJN still has plenty of strength to interfere, but at this point we can afford some losses.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to Smeulders)

Post #: 760

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/17/2010 2:37:26 AM

Venividivici10044

Posts: 137
Joined: 8/29/2009
Status: offline

I think the overall discussion of Timor and Darwin needs to be considered in the guise of Supreme Commander Syndrome. In real life many agendas and personalities vied for control of resources and personal glory. In real life if one supreme commander had existed, perhaps reason would have occurred and the DEI would have become the penultimate target to end the war early. I'm sure other ways exist to win (or lose) the game; hopefully enterprising players will uncover other possible strategies. In my humble opinion, if Japan wants to take Darwin, pour in the troops. Australia will eventually become a wonderful prison camp for the IJA.

EDIT - In real life - Japan was spread too thin. Midway certainly knocked time off the war; I think Guadalcanal extended things but helped in the long run from the experiences gained. Japan attempting to annex portions of Australia and NZ will only hasten the end through the loss of resources in other places. In my opinion, I don't care about VPs for determining victory. For me, victory comes in 2 ways - avoiding the destruction of the home islands as Japan, or destroying Japan as a combatant fully as the Allies. END EDIT

< Message edited by Venividivici10044 -- 2/17/2010 2:40:39 AM >

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 761

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/18/2010 5:11:13 PM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

Combat Report, Jan 15-18, 1943

Very little to report, as the Allies re-organize and start loading up for new destinations.

Terapo: I landed a Cav Unit, a couple battalions to clear Terapo. My troops were not very well prepped, and are stuck on a Nav Gd unit. We are close to dislodging it, so we can build an airstrip to protect the Torres Strait.

Kendari: We are beginning to load-up for a major landing on Kendari; 3 divisions in all, plus tanks. Based on recon, it should be more than enough. Simultaneously, I am also landing a unit at Kolaka, which is vacant, mostly to cut retreat routes.

Once this is complete, we land at Makassar.

Luganville: Shipping is also gathering for a 2 division landing on Luganville. I am not sure if I have quite enough, so we will land what we can. Once we clear Luganville, the next step is a landing at Koumac, and then isolating Noumea. This will close the New Hebrides campaign, and allow us to go 100% into the DEI.

_____________________________

(in reply to Venividivici10044)

Post #: 762

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/20/2010 3:31:03 AM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

Combat Report, Jan 19,20,21, 1943

Quiet Days, but a couple things cooking.

Kendari: This invasion force is loaded up and sailing toward Kendari. Based on intel, and what I have, I expect this to go fast, but you never know. OOB for us is 2 UN Infantry Divisions, 2 tank Bns, Artillery, and an HQ; all are 100% prepped.

I am also landing at Kolaka to cut retreat paths.

Terapo: This base near Port Moresby falls on the 20th, with the Nav Gd unit retreating into the jungle. We will develop this into a small airstrip. I am picking up the attackers and moving them to Darwin, to prep for targets in the DEI.

Sub Wars: 3 AK sinkings in 3 days. Subs are getting more frisky.

Luganville: We are ready to load up in a day or two. This might be a tough target, but I need to clear it to secure my supplies. I have over 2 divisions. On the 19th, DBs from Efate nailed a small transport TF at Luganville, sinking 2 AK, 1 PB, and an E. Nice!

Palmyra: A Tanker TF reported seeing a Japanese aircraft near Palmyra. Could be FOW, but it could be some sort of raiding TF. I am clearing the area as a precaution, though aside from the tankers, not much was around.

_____________________________

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 763

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/20/2010 4:54:08 PM

ckammp

Posts: 756
Joined: 5/30/2009
From: Rear Area training facility
Status: offline

What is your estimate of the size of the Japanese force at Noumea? IIRC, Cuttlefish needed 3-4 divisions + artillery units to capture the base. If any of those units are still there, do you think he will attempt to save them, or write them off?

Slightly OT question re Noumea: The base finally fell on 18 Aug, but you were able to save a fragment of the 41st Division. Have you been able to rebuild the Division yet? If so, how long did it take?

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 764

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/20/2010 5:05:19 PM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ckammp

What is your estimate of the size of the Japanese force at Noumea? IIRC, Cuttlefish needed 3-4 divisions + artillery units to capture the base. If any of those units are still there, do you think he will attempt to save them, or write them off?

Slightly OT question re Noumea: The base finally fell on 18 Aug,�but you were able to save a fragment of the 41st Division. Have you been able to rebuild the Division yet? If so, how long did it take?

I don't have an estimate of the Japanese on Noumea. I plan to land about 1 1/2 divisions at Koumac, build an airbase, and sit. I don't plan to overwhelm Noumea unless noone is there, but rather to just isolate and bomb it.

The 41st Division is at Suva, and is nearly rebuilt. I am landing this unit on New Caledonia, which I think is poetic justice, no?

Combat Report, Jan 20, 1942

Kendari: My invasion fleet should be spotted tommorow, when it will be 2 hexes off Kendari. They will start landing the next day, along with a force at Kolaka. Once Kendari falls, I will start closing airbases closer to Koepang, and moving the airbase units forward. After Kendari, Makassar.

Ultimately, I plan to advance as far as Den Passar and Benjermisan, to guard the Makassar strait entrance from Singapore, then move up the Makassar Strait, around the coast of Borneo, and into the Phillipines Archipelago. In this way I will bypass Mindanao, which intel tells me has at least 3 divisions on it.

Raiders!: Yesterday, a tanker TF spotted a floatplane off Hawaii. I have found that although the TYPE of plane is often FOW (they said it was a fighter bomber), usually there aren't alot of false sightings of enemy planes. I figured it had to be surface ships, because a) his CVs were all in the DEI, and b) if they were CVs, that search plane would have been accompanied by a strike.

Sure enough, the next day we were intercepted. I was surprised to see raiders this deep; I need to check my air search again.

One thing odd about this TF: It included CL Kashima, which would slow up the whole TF by at least 9 kts. (IIRC, Musashi tops out at 27 kts, and Kashima 18kts.). Strange!

The result was predictable:

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Q-Ball -- 2/20/2010 5:06:57 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to ckammp)

Post #: 765

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/20/2010 6:58:59 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Raiders!: Yesterday, a tanker TF spotted a floatplane off Hawaii. I have found that although the TYPE of plane is often FOW (they said it was a fighter bomber), usually there aren't alot of false sightings of enemy planes. I figured it had to be surface ships, because a) his CVs were all in the DEI, and b) if they were CVs, that search plane would have been accompanied by a strike.

Hi Q-ball,

What made you think that this plane was something other than a nuisance scouting by a Glen?

_____________________________

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 766

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/20/2010 7:57:00 PM

TheElf

Posts: 3870
Joined: 5/14/2003
From: Pax River, MD
Status: offline

Q-ball, I posted this in Cuttlefish's AAR. The sentiments are equally applicable to you and yours...

...this is an outstanding AAR. One of, if not the best I have ever seen. You and Q-ball are masterful strategists, and your exemplary attitudes, and concepts of fair play contribute more to this community than you could possibly imagine. I applaud your resolve to continue as I think this particular experiment in alternative history has a lot of life left in it, particularly given your personal zeal and intimate knowledge of the subject. Congrats and good fortune...

_____________________________

IN PERPETUUM SINGULARIS SEDES

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 767

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/20/2010 9:29:18 PM

Reg

Posts: 2787
Joined: 5/26/2000
From: NSW, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Raiders!: .....

One thing odd about this TF: It included CL Kashima, which would slow up the whole TF by at least 9 kts. (IIRC, Musashi tops out at 27 kts, and Kashima 18kts.). Strange!

Wow, using the Musashi for a long distance commerce raid. CF musn't be too worried about fuel.....

Probably intended to make a point!!!

_____________________________

Cheers,
Reg.

(One day I will learn to spell - or check before posting....)
Uh oh, Firefox has a spell checker!! What excuse can I use now!!!

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 768

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/20/2010 9:47:06 PM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

A few more months and you will be able to spare a couple of light carriers to hunt down these miscreants when they hit you. But for now, it is just a nuisance.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Reg)

Post #: 769

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/20/2010 10:46:12 PM

Smeulders

Posts: 1879
Joined: 8/9/2009
Status: offline

That's one big group to be raiding, easier to spot and absolute overkill for small merchant convoys. Anyway, not much more than a nuisance and a way to boost Cuttlefishes morale, nice operation by him though.

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 770

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/21/2010 2:33:26 AM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

Elf: High praise indeed! Thank you, I respect your opinion.
Chickenboy: I shouldn't have drawn that conclusion actually, at the time I didn't think of a GLEN plane. I haven't seen a single GLEN sub west of Johnston since the opening week though. But I wasn't 100% sure anyway.

Combat Report, Jan 21, 22, 1943

Raiders: I am stepping up my air search to counter any other raiders if there are any out there. That's about all I can do for now, if I had a CV TF in Pearl I could have done something about Musashi, but I don't, so all I can do it evacuate everyone else and hope she sails away.

Luganville: This landing will load up in a couple days. I have 3 divisions for this at Suva, plus tanks. This should be enough, but you never know. I have air support from Efate and Tanna.

Kendari: The landings here came off very well, from the map below. It should fall quickly.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to Smeulders)

Post #: 771

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/21/2010 2:04:02 PM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

Combat Report, Jan 23, 24, 1942

Kendari: An empty Kolaka fell to a tank Bn; at Kendari, the first attack dropped the forts to 2, at 1-1, and caused more Japanese casualties. Tinas were intercepted again lifting units out. The base should fall tommorow or the next day; I already have base troops on the way to get it open.

We have units prepped for Makassar already, so we will probably unload the shipping, get some base troops, then land on Makassar. Other units are prepping for Mataram and Balikpapan, which are also on the list.

Sub Wars: Interesting couple days. With the Makassar strait closed, I have been heavily patrolling the Taiwan strait, and haven't seen a tanker there in months. I decided to send a couple subs to the Phillipines archipelago, specifically above and below Samar. Sure enough, in 2 days we spot 3 different tanker TFs, putting torps in 2, and for sure sinking one, a big Tonan Whaler off Samar by an S-Boat.

Cuttlefish must have been moving tankers all along through the Phillipines! That's why I hand't seen any.

I will step-up patrols there, at this point there are only about 7 hexes he can transit all his FUEL/OIL through between the Taiwan straits and the Phillipines, so we should be able to keep up active patrols. Still, he is way ahead in tanker losses, so more than likely, I'll have to just interdict the actual Oil sources to stop the supply (I have already done so basically for Balikpapan).

_____________________________

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 772

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/23/2010 7:13:27 PM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

Combat Report, Jan 25 to 30, 1943

Quick update; for the most part, I have not seen the IJN at all, and just air oppossition in spots. Mostly, this report is about invasion updates:

Kendari: Kendari fell on the 26th, with the Japanese garrison (65th Bde, 32 Nav Gd) running into the jungle. With Kendari secure, I immediately started preps for the two divisions that took it, one for Menado, the other for Balikpapan.

Mataram: 2 UK Brigades departed Waingapu for Mataram, which will move our perimeter 4 hexes NW. After that, I will land at Den Passar, and probably stop. Mataram is undefended, we are going to establish an airbase there to protect our flank and pretend to threaten Java.

Luganville: 2 US Divisions plus tanks are aboard transports sailing for Tanna; from there, they will proceed under aircover to Luganville. Bombers are hitting Luganville to keep the Betties there in check, but we will accept a few losses in this operation. Closing Luganville will isolate New Caledonia, and allow me to pummel that island to dust and open a direct supply line to Australia.

I am already using the Torres Strait to get convoys to Darwin without mishap so far. I would like to clear Merauke just to make sure.

Makassar: Once I land at Mataram, I will land at Makassar, and a couple points on that tip of Celebes. Troops are already prepped, including 2 divisions.

_____________________________

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 773

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/23/2010 7:23:19 PM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

Pretty amazing. In my WITP game I had to just bypass Kendari. No way I was going to take it. Nice base to own....

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 774

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/23/2010 7:51:24 PM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Pretty amazing. In my WITP game I had to just bypass Kendari. No way I was going to take it. Nice base to own....

It will come in handy; once I take Menado, I can move my forward basing stuff from Koepang to Kendari. By that I mean our auxilliary shipping (AKE,AD,AS,AR,AV,AG, all that stuff), fuel stocks, and Naval Support units. But for now, Koepang is my forward base.

I really want Balikpapan though, because that will really help the fuel situation (and hurt Cuttlefish, though it's already closed to Japanese shipping basically).

After that, I plan an advance up the south and east coasts of Borneo. Once I have Jesselton/Beaufort secure, the Japanese are in real trouble, because I can interdict shipping the South China Sea. Do that, and the Japanese economy collapses in a year.

_____________________________

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 775

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/27/2010 2:19:27 AM

ckammp

Posts: 756
Joined: 5/30/2009
From: Rear Area training facility
Status: offline

Once you have Makassar and Balikpapan, do you plan on strategic bombing against Java/North Borneo, just concentrate against Japanese shipping, or both? Or do you and Cuttlefish have a HR against strategic bombing this early in the game?

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 776

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/27/2010 5:21:05 AM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

ckammp: We have a HR against Pre-1944 strategic bombing. Otherwise, I would be bombing Balikpapan. I plan to be within range of all of Borneo by then though.....

Combat Report, Feb 1 to 5, 1943

Raiders!: Not the kind from Oakland, but there have been a couple raiding TF's sighted.

First, a TF was spotted on the 1st off Lord Howe Island. This TF was uncomfortably close to a very large TF with lots of air units being shipped to Australia. As it happens, an RAAF Hudson spotted them, and they disappeared, I guess withdrawing.

On the 5th, Musashi and friends (same TF that sank my tankers a couple weeks back), hit Pago Pago. WOW, that's deep in Indian country. The only ships were a couple PTs, but this was another uncomfortable hit.

I have been moving my convoys is very large convoys, to limit the effectiveness of their subs. I may need to reassess that, and tighten my air search, because Pago Pago is way too deep in Indian country. Bad!

Luganville: I landed at Luganville on the 2nd. I brought the 27th and Americal Divisions, a Combat Eng Bn, 1 Tank Bn, and artillery. The garrison is 1/3 of a division, a Nav Gd unit, and base troops.

The landings came off without a hitch. Heavy air attacks for two days basically closed the airstrip at Luganville, though at high cost in Allied fighters. On day 3, a large TF of 3 IJN BBs hit my landing zone; they sparred with my covering force centered on Maryland, and the result was inconclusive. Nothing sank while the Japanese broke off, though I lost a DD the next morning to a sub. This result was disappointing for Cuttlefish, because he had me outnumbered, and it failed to disrupt the landing.

The first attack dropped the forts, and I expect to have it in a week or less, depending on resistance.

Mataram: We landed at Mataram on the 3rd. Below is the current situation in the DEI.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to ckammp)

Post #: 777

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/28/2010 3:35:44 PM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

Combat Report, Feb 6-8, 1943

No major actions these days, mostly the Allies moving things around....

Luganville: The forts are down to zero, but my troops need a little rest before trying again. I anticipate clearing the base in about 3 days or so. Once that happens, we will start looking at landing at Koumac, where I have had some troops prepping for.

At Koumac we will build an airbase, and I will leave some Kiwi units to watch the Japs at Noumea (Kiwis, because their replacement rate is very low, so low-intesity combat situations is a good use for them). All the US formations will then be moved into the DEI.

The unloading at Luganville is taking awhile. IJN Surface forces seem to be gathering at Rabaul and Lunga (Rabaul is under air search from Port Moresby). I was lucky last time that combat was inconclusive, but we're not going to press that luck; I am departing Luganville for the moment with all my ships, and will come back after we take the base and I can have some aircover.

Mataram: Mostly unloaded, and base troops are on the way. Recon shows that Den Passar is empty; I may go ahead and grab that base, then stop short of Java. At the moment, I am not inclined to invade Java, it looks to me like I will get bogged down in those hills, and at any rate there is a big stack at Soerbaya, and intel has identified at least 2 divisions on Java. It would take at least 4 divisions to clear it, probably more, and that's more of a land commitment than I want to make.

Makassar: The invasion of the Southwest Celebes is loading up. The centerpiece will be a 2+ Division landing on Makassar, consisting of the 6th Australian Div, and 1st Marines, plus a UK Bde. Another AIF Brigade will land at Watampone, and a para regt will land at Palopo; these movements will cut the retreat route for the Japanese, and allow me to destroy the Makassar garrison in the south.

The terrain in that corner of Celebes means that I can march troops up about 4 hexes, so if I have enough land forces I can simply walk to Pare Pare, and establish an airbase within SBD range of Balikpapan. That will close Balikpapan for sure, and provide cover for a landing there; I am already prepping 2 divisions for Balikpapan.

Sub Wars: A couple weeks ago I began moving my subs from a combat deployment around my bases in the DEI, to more of a strategic deployment, watching the Taiwan Strait and the Phillipines Archipelago. The number of places his Oil must be moving is limited, because I effectively control the Makassar Strait, so everything has to go through the South China Sea.

Lately, I have sunk 3 AKs in the Taiwan Strait, including one with troops, and a large TK off Naha.

_____________________________

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 778

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/28/2010 4:33:45 PM

ComradeP

Posts: 7192
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline

Q-Ball, are you going to put anything on Selayar (possibly the base is called Benteng), the island with the Dutch flag between Flores and Celebes?

(in reply to Q-Ball)

Post #: 779

RE: Battle of the Banda Sea - 2/28/2010 6:17:46 PM

Q-Ball

Posts: 7336
Joined: 6/25/2002
From: Chicago, Illinois
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

Q-Ball, are you going to put anything on Selayar (possibly the base is called Benteng), the island with the Dutch flag between Flores and Celebes?

I had planned to occupy it, but I don't think it's needed now. I should be able to get ashore no problem supported from Kendari, so no need to expend effort on Salajar.

_____________________________

(in reply to ComradeP)

Post #: 780