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: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

 
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: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 Page: <<   < prev  37 38 39 40 [41]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 10/6/2011 2:04:07 PM   
CT Grognard

 

Posts: 694
Joined: 5/16/2010
From: Cape Town, South Africa
Status: offline
The Seikan Tunnel connecting Honshu and Hokkaido was only opened in 1988.

A 3.6km single-track railway tunnel was completed in 1942 as a fixed link between Kyushu and Honshu. Another single-track tunnel was completed in 1944. The double-track Shin Kanmon Tunnel was completed in 1975.

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 1201
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 10/6/2011 2:18:53 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
Really seems like I recall a tunnel between Shikoku and Honshu.  Wasn't big, and it was old ... I might be wrong though.  A lot of years have passed ....


_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to CT Grognard)
Post #: 1202
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 10/6/2011 2:29:25 PM   
CT Grognard

 

Posts: 694
Joined: 5/16/2010
From: Cape Town, South Africa
Status: offline
Not sure at all - I only know of three bridges currently connecting Shikoku and Honshu.

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 1203
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 10/7/2011 11:56:06 PM   
Wirraway_Ace


Posts: 1400
Joined: 10/8/2007
From: Austin / Brisbane
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Chickenboy, I'm still torn with the PDU thing. I'll ask Ted, though he didn't care one way or the other last time.

Anyway, I've been thinking of my numerous mistakes this game and what to do differently next time.

Here's the initial list off the top of my head. Comments are welcome.

1. Conversion of Yusen-A (7) and Husimi(15+) to AK immediately.

2. Conversion of all Ansyu-C to PB immediately.

3. Convert all AK (above and Yusen-S) to AK-t immediately.

4. Combine elements of land units as soon as possible. I didn't do this in this game because I wanted to have the ability to task organize. Unfortunately, it resulted in many of the smaller units being trashed in combat. I think losses (and possibly disruption) would be lower if the divisions are combined before major combat.

5. Faster invasion timelines, especially in the DEI. Q-Ball and Chickenboy harped on me incessantly to speed up my timeline. They were right.

6. Take Ambon early! They harped on me to take this base in the initial round of invasions. I did't take it until late January. Japanese control of this base with Netties & recon there will cause more Allied shipping losses and cut off the northern DEI very effectively. I won't make that mistake again.

7. Take Singapore faster. I made two crucial mistakes here. I ran out of supply (stupid!). I'm going to send supply convoys from Japan at the beginning of the war this time. Too much supply is far better than too little. Second mistake was to not have enough ground strength. Here's my intent for initial invasions. I'll need some help tweaking this because I'll need to figure out how to get at least another division to the DEI.


Thanks. I look forward to your comments.

Mike,

I do not convert to AK-t. My rationale: when the amphib bonus runs out, you need every AK to move heavy equipment and off-load it rapidly on the beach or small port. The infantry can simply be loaded onto a large number of xAKs and xAPs; it takes about 30 to offload all the infantry squads of an IJA division in one turn, but you have plenty of these to conduct Corps sized ops. Save the AKs for your artillery, armor and engineer vehicle that simply won't offload over the beach from an xAK or xAP.

my 2 cents
Mike

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 1204
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 10/8/2011 4:15:32 AM   
erstad

 

Posts: 1944
Joined: 8/3/2004
From: Midwest USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Xargun


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Pretty sure that Shikoku resources do not need independent pickup, Mike. They are magically transported across the water, IIRC. Hey, it frees up a bunch of your shipping!


Do we have confirmation of this ?

Xargun


quote:

s


Yes. Use the "r" key - you will see there is an in-game major road connecting Shikoku to Honshu.


(in reply to Xargun)
Post #: 1205
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 10/8/2011 7:56:53 AM   
inqistor


Posts: 1813
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Inqistor, I guess I was unclear. I will use the Nates in the frontline until they are replaced. Actually, I plan on upgrading 1 chutai to Oscars immediately. There are enough Nates in the pool to fill out all the Nate units in the 3 & 5 Air Divisions. The concern is that there won't be any spares to replace losses until I get enough Oscars to upgrade other Nate units. It's something I'll have to live with.

Actually, I am saying, that it is worth considering running NATEs production for a short time. They have nothing in the upgrade path, so factories will be damaged during conversion. That way, if you leave them on production, you will have extra 30 NATEs at the end of month, if you will change, you will have only about 12 OSCARs, hardly enough to even convert something. And remember, that it is good to have reserve planes, as they will come into repired planes place.

quote:

Good point on the 1E bombers & level 2 airfields. I was unclear here too I guess. I will use them until they are upgraded. Initially, they are very effective against Allied merchant shipping but become less effective as the merchant shipping becomes more scarce.

Hmm, and why are they actually more effective, than normal level bombers? In WITP they were DB, but I do not think in AE they dive, or even glide, so they should have similar hit ratio, as SALLYs (even worse, because medium bombers carry more bombs).

quote:

ORIGINAL: CT Grognard

The Seikan Tunnel connecting Honshu and Hokkaido was only opened in 1988.

A 3.6km single-track railway tunnel was completed in 1942 as a fixed link between Kyushu and Honshu. Another single-track tunnel was completed in 1944. The double-track Shin Kanmon Tunnel was completed in 1975.

So, there was no land connection between islands before war?

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 1206
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 10/8/2011 1:10:40 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wirraway_Ace
Mike,

I do not convert to AK-t. My rationale: when the amphib bonus runs out, you need every AK to move heavy equipment and off-load it rapidly on the beach or small port. The infantry can simply be loaded onto a large number of xAKs and xAPs; it takes about 30 to offload all the infantry squads of an IJA division in one turn, but you have plenty of these to conduct Corps sized ops. Save the AKs for your artillery, armor and engineer vehicle that simply won't offload over the beach from an xAK or xAP.

my 2 cents
Mike


Mike, great comments and really good points. I'm very cautious with my xAPs and keep them out of the front line. If I were to perform an invasion after the bonus period, I wouldn't fully load the AKs because it would take quite a while to unload them. More thinking needed about this now.

The xAPs have 123k troop space and 78k cargo space. Granted, they are most efficient between large ports (hubs) so the AKs will need to do the hauling from the hub to the final destination. I need to find out what the AKs actually can carry. They may be needed for basic troop movement. I need to dig into this more. Thanks.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Wirraway_Ace)
Post #: 1207
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 10/8/2011 1:11:06 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: erstad


quote:

ORIGINAL: Xargun


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Pretty sure that Shikoku resources do not need independent pickup, Mike. They are magically transported across the water, IIRC. Hey, it frees up a bunch of your shipping!


Do we have confirmation of this ?

Xargun


quote:

s


Yes. Use the "r" key - you will see there is an in-game major road connecting Shikoku to Honshu.




Bingo! Thanks, erstad.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to erstad)
Post #: 1208
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 10/8/2011 1:36:59 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: inqistor

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Inqistor, I guess I was unclear. I will use the Nates in the frontline until they are replaced. Actually, I plan on upgrading 1 chutai to Oscars immediately. There are enough Nates in the pool to fill out all the Nate units in the 3 & 5 Air Divisions. The concern is that there won't be any spares to replace losses until I get enough Oscars to upgrade other Nate units. It's something I'll have to live with.

Actually, I am saying, that it is worth considering running NATEs production for a short time. They have nothing in the upgrade path, so factories will be damaged during conversion. That way, if you leave them on production, you will have extra 30 NATEs at the end of month, if you will change, you will have only about 12 OSCARs, hardly enough to even convert something. And remember, that it is good to have reserve planes, as they will come into repired planes place.

quote:

Good point on the 1E bombers & level 2 airfields. I was unclear here too I guess. I will use them until they are upgraded. Initially, they are very effective against Allied merchant shipping but become less effective as the merchant shipping becomes more scarce.

Hmm, and why are they actually more effective, than normal level bombers? In WITP they were DB, but I do not think in AE they dive, or even glide, so they should have similar hit ratio, as SALLYs (even worse, because medium bombers carry more bombs).

quote:

ORIGINAL: CT Grognard

The Seikan Tunnel connecting Honshu and Hokkaido was only opened in 1988.

A 3.6km single-track railway tunnel was completed in 1942 as a fixed link between Kyushu and Honshu. Another single-track tunnel was completed in 1944. The double-track Shin Kanmon Tunnel was completed in 1975.

So, there was no land connection between islands before war?


The comments about Nates make sense, but I view it somewhat differently. I want to get my Oscar production increased as quickly as possible. But, if I do keep the Nate factory producing Nates for Dec, 41 and then convert it, I'm a month behind in producing Oscars for it and lose 30 Oscars in Jan 42. That's a Sentai of Nates that won't get converted to Oscars in Jan. By the end of Dec 41, I expect to have about 100 Oscars producing a month. With 3 factories producing, I'll have produced about 60 Oscars. I will have upgraded a Nate sentai to Oscars and have an extra 30-40 Nates in the pool.

Here are some stats:

I want to max out the Nates in the 3 & 5 Air Divisions. On 7 Dec, here are the Nate shortages:

3 AD:

1 S - 42 of 42
11 S - 38 of 42
84 IFC - 9 of 12
64 S Det - 6 of 12 (I'm upgrading to 11 Ki-43-Ic, cleaning out that pool & putting 6 more Nates in the pool)
77 S - 15 of 42
77 S Det A - 9 of 12
77 S Det B - 12 of 12

5 AD:

24 S - 36 of 42
50 S - 36 of 36

The following Nate shortages exist:

3 AD: 37
5 AD: 6

So, there are 43 shortages and 39 (+6 from 64 S Det) or 45 Nates in the pool. All shortages can be filled with 2 spare Nates.

The Oscar Ic factory is producing 32 a month with that factory and 2 others increasing their size by 32 each. The 32 in existence will produce 1 a day or 24 by the end of the month. Each factory that is increasing will produce about 12 in Dec for a grand total of 60 Oscars. By about 15 or 16 Dec, I'll have enough Oscars in the pool to upgrade a 12 plane chutai, putting 10-12 Nates in the pool. That should be sufficient to replace losses. After that, Oscar production should speed up, accelerating upgrades and putting more Nates in the pool. If there is a shortage of either Oscars or Nates, it'll only be for a week to 10 days tops. I don't expect to lose too many Nates or Oscars at the beginning of the war.

1E bombers. It's not that they are more effective than 2E bombers. They can fly from level 2 airfields, which makes them valuable at the start of the war. There are a lot of level 2 airfields that can be used by them to support operations.

< Message edited by Mike Solli -- 10/8/2011 1:39:56 PM >


_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 1209
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 10/8/2011 1:37:39 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline
Duplicate

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 1210
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 10/8/2011 8:55:12 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline
Next thing to think about...

The Zuiho carries 18 torpedoes. Looks like I'll reconfigure her daitai to carry 21 Zeros and 9 Kates. Two full sorties. Two spares of each and she's good.

Now the Ryujo. She carries 48 planes (or is it 53 - for some reason that number sticks in my mind). Anyway, she carries 27 torpedoes. Here's the problem. I don't want her to have 27 Kates. That's too many. What if she has 18? After one round of torps, she'll have only 9 left. Will an 18 plane daitai sortie with half with torps and half with bombs for a naval target? I guess that's the question. If not, she'll have to carry 13 Kates and 35 Zeros. I guess that's ok. I'd like some more Kates though.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 1211
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 10/8/2011 9:55:34 PM   
PaxMondo


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

The comments about Nates make sense, but I view it somewhat differently. I want to get my Oscar production increased as quickly as possible. But, if I do keep the Nate factory producing Nates for Dec, 41 and then convert it, I'm a month behind in producing Oscars for it and lose 30 Oscars in Jan 42. That's a Sentai of Nates that won't get converted to Oscars in Jan.

Mike, this is exactly how I think it through as well.

I understand that my total fighter production is down, but I don't care about that. What I do care about is getting my total Oscar production up as fast as I can.

Great to read someone else is thinking along the same lines. Sometimes I worry if I'm missing something really obvious.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 1212
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 10/8/2011 10:01:05 PM   
PaxMondo


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Now the Ryujo. She carries 48 planes (or is it 53 - for some reason that number sticks in my mind). Anyway, she carries 27 torpedoes. Here's the problem. I don't want her to have 27 Kates. That's too many. What if she has 18? After one round of torps, she'll have only 9 left. Will an 18 plane daitai sortie with half with torps and half with bombs for a naval target? I guess that's the question. If not, she'll have to carry 13 Kates and 35 Zeros. I guess that's ok. I'd like some more Kates though.

I don't know the answer here for a fact, but I suspect that they will go out partial. I only say that because many times I have ended up with 0 torps on a CV, but didn't have an even number of planes to have flown them all. Does that make sense?

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 1213
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 10/8/2011 10:17:42 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline
Yeah, it does. Thanks Pax.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 1214
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 10/8/2011 10:20:07 PM   
Erkki


Posts: 1461
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Now the Ryujo. She carries 48 planes (or is it 53 - for some reason that number sticks in my mind). Anyway, she carries 27 torpedoes. Here's the problem. I don't want her to have 27 Kates. That's too many. What if she has 18? After one round of torps, she'll have only 9 left. Will an 18 plane daitai sortie with half with torps and half with bombs for a naval target? I guess that's the question. If not, she'll have to carry 13 Kates and 35 Zeros. I guess that's ok. I'd like some more Kates though.

I don't know the answer here for a fact, but I suspect that they will go out partial. I only say that because many times I have ended up with 0 torps on a CV, but didn't have an even number of planes to have flown them all. Does that make sense?


All of them will fly - some will attack with torpedoes, others with bombs.

_____________________________


(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 1215
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 10/8/2011 10:22:46 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline
Excellent, thanks erkki


_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Erkki)
Post #: 1216
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 10/9/2011 8:13:12 PM   
inqistor


Posts: 1813
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

The comments about Nates make sense, but I view it somewhat differently. I want to get my Oscar production increased as quickly as possible. But, if I do keep the Nate factory producing Nates for Dec, 41 and then convert it, I'm a month behind in producing Oscars for it and lose 30 Oscars in Jan 42. That's a Sentai of Nates that won't get converted to Oscars in Jan. By the end of Dec 41, I expect to have about 100 Oscars producing a month. With 3 factories producing, I'll have produced about 60 Oscars. I will have upgraded a Nate sentai to Oscars and have an extra 30-40 Nates in the pool.

There is plenty factories producing planes, and change fighter-fighter model do not gives any more benefit, than bomber-fighter factory. I am planning to begin at last GC as Japan, and NATEs production seems to be my current planning problem. In March/April there arrives few new NATE units, which will need around 100 planes to fill them. So around two months production could be needed. Problem is, I do not see to what then change this factory. A6M3 seems reasonable, but it arrives few months later.

quote:

1E bombers. It's not that they are more effective than 2E bombers. They can fly from level 2 airfields, which makes them valuable at the start of the war. There are a lot of level 2 airfields that can be used by them to support operations.

Well, in that case, it is better to use VALs. Problem is finding spare units with them

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 1217
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 12/17/2011 10:57:25 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline
Wohoo! It's finally done and off to Ted! Now is my turn to wait. Shouldn't take too long though. He really doesn't have much to do though.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 1218
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 12/17/2011 11:27:37 PM   
Mac Linehan

 

Posts: 1484
Joined: 12/19/2004
From: Denver Colorado
Status: offline
Mike -

It's Great to have you and Ted back at it!

Mac

_____________________________

LAV-25 2147

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 1219
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 12/17/2011 11:43:08 PM   
PaxMondo


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Wohoo! It's finally done and off to Ted! Now is my turn to wait. Shouldn't take too long though. He really doesn't have much to do though.

Great news!

You're ahead of me, still working through my first turn, but I am close now ...

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 1220
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 12/17/2011 11:47:48 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline
Pax, make sure you run a test turn to see what mistakes you may have made. I ended up making about a dozen changes. Most were minor but my major invasion base in the Philippines is now changed from Lingayan to San Fernando.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 1221
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 12/18/2011 12:18:30 AM   
PaxMondo


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Pax, make sure you run a test turn to see what mistakes you may have made. I ended up making about a dozen changes. Most were minor but my major invasion base in the Philippines is now changed from Lingayan to San Fernando.

That's where I am now, testing all of my sea moves and bombing. Made the same change. The AB starts more developed, a big deal, and still on the rail line.

Then I have to load my factories and set my training groups. I always do those last in case I need a unit to support an attack that comes out of my testing. I'm doing a number of different things in China this time ...

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 1222
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 12/18/2011 1:04:25 AM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline
I'm doing quite a bit differently as well. I think the biggest change is sending Kaga into the SRA. It'll move to Cam Ranh Bay on 7 Dec. The Ryujo will move to Takao on 7 Dec and convert to 30 Zeros on 8 Dec. Eventually, "mini" KB will have 86 Zeros, 27 Vals and 72 Kates. Very nice. It should hasten my advances there. I'm also going for Mersing. If that goes well, Ted should have no more than 400 AV to defend Singapore. The rest will be trapped north of Singapore. I'll take more merchant casualties but in the long run, it'll allow the capture of Singapore much more quickly.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 1223
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 12/18/2011 4:40:27 AM   
PaxMondo


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

... I'm also going for Mersing. If that goes well, Ted should have no more than 400 AV to defend Singapore. The rest will be trapped north of Singapore. I'll take more merchant casualties but in the long run, it'll allow the capture of Singapore much more quickly.

I'll be watching this with interest ... I run about 2:3 (67%) successful on this ... 1/3 of the time those dang stringers get to me as I can't get enough cover. But, if you have Kaga there .... maybe enough. So, I'm gonna be watching this with interest to see how it plays out.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 1224
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 12/18/2011 4:58:06 AM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline
I ended up using the Yamada det Zeros as LRCAP. They tear up the Brits. I expect Force Z to run. for Java. If they head NE, they die. Ted likes to keep it as a force in being to torment me (and I agree with that concept). I do the same with KB. Most of the time it's sitting in port somewhere out of sight. If I guess right, it can be in position to trash whatever comes after me. I rarely send it against the Brits. Then it's too far out of position.

I'm really curious to see what Kaga does. I'll keep her out of sight (if I can) until I can catch Force Z or the US cruisers.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 1225
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 12/18/2011 5:02:13 AM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline
I was curious to see what the 5 CVs do against Pearl. I ran a test twice. Once it did basically nothing but lost only 1 Val. The second time it sank 2 BBs, heavily damaged 5 more and the last had moderate damage for the loss of 2 Kates. Both times it sank 2-3 DD/CLs. Curious that so few planes were lost.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 1226
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 12/18/2011 12:14:10 PM   
PaxMondo


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

I was curious to see what the 5 CVs do against Pearl. I ran a test twice. Once it did basically nothing but lost only 1 Val. The second time it sank 2 BBs, heavily damaged 5 more and the last had moderate damage for the loss of 2 Kates. Both times it sank 2-3 DD/CLs. Curious that so few planes were lost.

I suspect this will not matter much. Face it, so much variablity in the results. Yeah, your top end is going to be lower, but I suspect the median isn't going to change much. Will you stay a 2nd/3rd day?

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 1227
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 12/18/2011 12:42:26 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline
I'm moving this over to the "real" AAR.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 1228
RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 - 12/18/2011 3:41:46 PM   
PaxMondo


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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

I'm moving this over to the "real" AAR.

Until our next "secret" planning session!


_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 1229
Page:   <<   < prev  37 38 39 40 [41]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464 Page: <<   < prev  37 38 39 40 [41]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.423