RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A)

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: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A)

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: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A)

Page: << < prev 18 19 [20] 21 22 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/15/2012 12:51:57 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

19 July 1942
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

No Pac: In the morning, before we could get off any air strikes, the North Carolina along with 2 CLAA and 2 DD shows up South of Nagai Island and hits the TF with CVE Unyo. I'm kicking myself today. I thought of forming a SCTF and having it follow Unyo, but I really didn't imagine he'd risk the NC so close to both CV and LBA. Well, it paid off. If I had made a SCTF with Fuso, Haguro, Kitakami and Oi he wouldn't have fared quite so well. Well, I guess I'm learning a bit about Jocke and it cost me another CVE.

Fuso has very moderate damage, and Kitakami will make it in spite of taking a few hits from NC. Strangely, nothing hit the fragile CLAAs.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Time Surface Combat, near Chirikof Island at 181,51, Range 26,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
CVE Unyo, Shell hits 6, heavy fires, heavy damage
BB Fuso, Shell hits 4, on fire
CA Haguro, Shell hits 1
CL Kitakami, Shell hits 3, heavy fires
CL Oi
DD Usugumo
DD Shirakumo
DD Fumizuki, Shell hits 1
DD Asanagi

Allied Ships
BB North Carolina, Shell hits 11, on fire
CLAA San Diego
CLAA San Juan
DD Aaron Ward, Shell hits 3, on fire
DD Buchanan, Shell hits 4, heavy fires

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Everything will try to limp back to Dutch Harbor. The 5th Fleet will load from Ominato to come help with repairs. I want to get things fixed up before some 4Es are sent up here to investigate the local anchorages.

Not a good day in the hunt for the Wasp either. She zigged just slightly East while we zagged SW and missed her. This of course meant that two AVs and an AMC were sunk. The Yubari TF is within 9 hexes of the CV will try to intercept tomorrow again. I'm prepared to lose this CL 4 DD TF for another chance at the Wasp.

subs: The KB runs into S-27 near Kirakira. It launches 4 torps and misses, thankfully. Still, this brings the number of sub attacks on CVs to 6 or 7, or around 1 per month. To many.

There are about 5 sub sightings in the area as well. The KB will veer off it's strait course and try to avoid the others.

This also blows our cover. No more sneakiness. We'll move into the area West of Noumea, but by the time the KB can get there, with this amount of warning, anything that was coming into the area will not be moving North or West any longer I fear.

So Pac: Jakes sortie from Noumea against whatever this convoy is, and find out it's at least a few cruisers and an xAP. Looks like an amphib convoy to me. Tomorrow 27 zeros and 12 Kates move to Noumea.

Also, from Louganville 2 Jakes sortied and hit the AVP Pelican at Anatom, dropping 1 60kg bomb on it. I do think something is brewing around here.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Norfolk Island at 119,168

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid detected at 39 NM, estimated altitude 5,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 19 minutes

Japanese aircraft
E13A1 Jake x 13

Japanese aircraft losses
E13A1 Jake: 3 damaged
E13A1 Jake: 1 destroyed by flak

Allied Ships
xAP Noordam
CA Australia, Bomb hits 1
CL Adelaide

Aircraft Attacking:
13 x E13A1 Jake bombing from 1000 feet
Naval Attack: 4 x 60 kg GP Bomb

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

West Australia: I sen the dogs out over Perth again today. First 36 zeros met 38 P-40E and 18 F4F-4. Lost 4 zeros for 3 P-40 and 2 Wildcats. Then 27 Zeros met 17 P-40E and 11 F4F-4. This time only 1 Zero was lost and 4 Warhawks and 3 Wildcats were shot down. Not bad.

China: At Urumchi the result of todays attack leaves little doubt where this mission is headed. Even though it was only 1:2 again, 45 infantry squads were destroyed. It's just a matter of time now unless something unforeseen happens, like the transport of new troops to the base.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Urumchi (79,11)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 1837 troops, 4 guns, 184 vehicles, Assault Value = 112

Defending force 3766 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 24

Japanese adjusted assault: 45

Allied adjusted defense: 51

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 1)

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), preparation(-), experience(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
50 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 8 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Allied ground losses:
551 casualties reported
Squads: 45 destroyed, 4 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 14 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 5 disabled

Assaulting units:
20th Recon Regiment
13th Tank Regiment
15th Tank Regiment
27th Electric Engr Rgt /1

Defending units:
259th Brigade
9th Separate Brigade
19th Chinese Base Force
21st Chinese Base Force
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by obvert -- 4/15/2012 12:53:29 PM >

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 571

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/15/2012 1:11:37 PM

ny59giants

Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline

I was playing John 3rd in a short G'canal game to help bring him up to speed with AE just after it came out. I had my Allied CVs off G'canal. He sent in a SC TF based on 2 BBs and some DDs. All three of my single CV TF got hit that night. Even with BBs and CAs embedded in the CV TF, they didn't help defend the CVs and all three took significant damage. The morale of the story is I very seldom send in CVs where there is a reasonable expectation of possible SC TF being present. I will weaken the CV TF to form a SC TF to have the CVs follow them. Hopefully, an enemy SC TF will have to go through my SC TF before the CVs get attacked.

< Message edited by ny59giants -- 4/15/2012 1:12:59 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 572

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/15/2012 1:26:11 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

I just never thought he'd leave the Wasp with only two DD to protect her. And if I had gone the right way, I would have most likely taken her out with CL Yubari and 4 DD. Still a chance of that. but slim now. I just chose the wrong side of the coin.

I always keep a SCTF with the CVs, and this time when I broke the rules I got nailed. That's what happens in this game, which is part of why I enjoy it so much. It's exacting, and once you mess up, it'll come back to haunt you.

I also find that as a newish player I still get a bit rattled by naval combat. My thinking goes slightly off. I need to just calm down and look at all of the options next time something similar happens. But, it is a long game and I should have a chance or two to do better soon. Maybe very soon.

(in reply to ny59giants)

Post #: 573

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/15/2012 1:34:04 PM

Historiker

Posts: 4742
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline

What orders do you give to catch the CV with your SCTF?

_____________________________

Without any doubt: I am the spawn of evil - and the Bavarian Beer Monster (BBM)!

There's only one bad word and that's taxes. If any other word is good enough for sailors; it's good enough for you. - Ron Swanson

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 574

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/15/2012 3:53:57 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker

What orders do you give to catch the CV with your SCTF?

I sent it full speed SW during the last turn, retirement allowed 6 hex react but with a destination patrol zone of one hex, so it could still react.

Today I set it to intercept the most likely course toward Seattle, basically full speed to a patrol point about five hexes in front of where it is now, (and about as far as this TF will go I think), with a waypoint at the spot it was last seen, again retirement allowed and 6 hex react.

(in reply to Historiker)

Post #: 575

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/15/2012 4:57:35 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

20 July 1942
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

No Pac: The Yubari and company missed a rendezvous with the Wasp. The Wasp's strike force did not miss the Yubari. I thought I might get off lightly when the first strike was late in the morning and only achieved one bomb hit on Yubari. The afternoon strike did much better, hitting Yubari with 3 1000 pounders and giving the DDs some damage as well. The Yubari went down before the day was finished.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

This has been a frustrating affair from the beginning. Jocke has done well, risked a lot, but gotten away with it. The Amagiri will try to limp back to the Aleutians. The other 2 DD have limited fuel left, not enough to make it home. They will try to still get in the way of the Wasp TF on their way past. Several subs are also no between the Wasp and Seattle.

So Pac: B-17s hit Noumea, taking out a Kate and a Zero. 3 were damaged but there were no ops losses reported.

The KB moved to the West of New Caledonia. The TF to the south is now out of search range. Looks like it's time to reverse course and go back to lurking at the edges of search. I'm not sure if it's good or bad that Jocke knows I can react quickly and with strength in the area. If that was an invasion toward Noumea, then it might make him think twice about going forward this early.

China: Bombing has shifted entirely to Chengtu and Chungking fields. Many supply hits per day should be having some effect.

Another DA will go tomorrow at Urumchi.

Burma: Over Myitkyina 74 Bleinheim and 48 Marauders hit the base with no escort. 30 Oscars meet them but can only shoot down 5 Bleinheims. This is where the Nicks would have been very useful.

That's a lot of MBs. He's doing well to get ten coordinated most of the time. These massive raids are tough even with these bombers, so it will be really tough when the B-25s, Wellingtons, and the 4Es take over.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by obvert -- 4/16/2012 10:11:56 AM >

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 576

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/15/2012 7:00:13 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

21 July 1942
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

subs: Ugh. S-42 opens the turn by launching 4 torps at CVL Shoho, hitting once. The ship is still afloat, and moveable, at 53 65(54) 14 damage. It's right at that level where I don't want to move it, but I have to move it. I'll drop it into the nearest island base, 1 hex away, and maybe in a few turns move it on to the next two hexes on. I had just thought I was getting out of this with something valuable still intact, but this caps a very bad week.

So Pac: The KB s moving back home, but still has to get through a gauntlet of US subs. At least 7 are spotted within a day's range. All Kates are put on ASW, and Vals on naval search at 2,000 ft.

Burma: Over Myitkyina 14 Hurricane IIb swept and took out 5 Oscars for 1 Hurricane. Oddly successful. Then a massive bombing raid arrived. 59 Bleiheims and 45 Marauders. This base just maxed out its damage.

China: At Urumchi the DA achieved a 2:1 and dropped forts to 0. 29 more Chinese infantry units were destroyed. The base should be ours within a few days.

Still not enough supply to attack at Chengtu.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by obvert -- 4/15/2012 7:01:39 PM >

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 577

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/16/2012 9:47:42 AM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

Aftermath
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The unproductive foray into the North Pacific for the IJN has given me some perspective on my current position and the next stage for the forces of the Empire. While not a poor idea to begin it was a risk perhaps not worth taking, and some further unfortunate tactical choices have led to the loss of 2 CVE, 1 CL 1 AMC and 2 AV. Barring more difficulties, the other ships will most likely be saved to fight again.

After the aborted invasion of the Perth area in West Australia and this defeat, Imperial Command has decided to adopt a largely defensive strategy for this point forward. Some success in the land war in China has given the Empire the luxury of focusing on logistical concerns and preparing for the defense of the perimeter.

The South Pacific area seems to be a focus of Allied interests currently. Noumea and New Caledonia is still occupied, although by a weak scouting force. Any landing will surely take the base, and the IJN cannot successfully and quickly enough turn back a landing force. Based in Tulagi, the KB can and will move into position to attack an amphibious force in the area, but most likely will only reach it after it has unloaded enough troops to take the base. A small raiding unit of several DDs will be placed at Koumac, believed to be beyond Allied search range.

The large force of troops now at Kodiak (15 units and over 35,000 troops) is something of a worry for the safety of the Aleutians. All bases are garrisoned, and the hope is that the recent action will at least confirm that during this summer up to the winter weather date in October the Empire will fight for these bases. Enough air and sea power is still in place to make the Allies use more than the one CV task force to secure an invasion in the area as long as our defense is conducted within range of LBA. The Wasp is surely due for some time in dry dock after taking a torpedo and a 250kg bomb, but is not severely damaged.

In Burma Allied air power is growing and the composition of the forces has given the IJAAF great difficulties. Massed sweeps of 50 P38s are now being seen followed by 100 bombers escorted by 50-70 fighters, targeting one base at a time. Our newest strategy has been to abandon the air defense of any base NW of Mandalay. Forces will be concentrated around the mutually supporting bases of Magwe, Mandalay, Meiktila and Taung Gi. The Tojo arrives within the next week. Hopefully this will give some ability to fight off P-38s, at least at better loss rate than the 3 or 4 to 1 we've been getting with Oscars/Zeros/Nicks. The Helen IIa also arrives this month. This should allow for some offensive operations to Allied bases, which haven't yet happened in this area.

SW OZ is stabilizing. The Allies are still basing large forces of fighters in the area (65 at Perth and 100 at Kalgoorlie), but seem to be moving some troops out. No fighters or significant bomber forces have yet been seen in NE OZ, which is a benefit of this operation so far. Land reinforcements still must be brought in to further garrison strongpoints like Milne Bay, Tulagi/Lunga, and for a mobile reserve force.

The game is definitely getting more interesting. As the Allies ramp up operations I'm again on my toes after several months following the major conquests in the SRA when I (probably unwisely) relaxed a bit. I look forward to the defense and to the process of cat and mouse with where the Allies will strike. I'm starting to see more moving everywhere, which means something will begin to happen soon.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 578

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/16/2012 12:49:59 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

22 July 1942
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

subs: The KB continues to find a lot of subs in its path. The Kates are starting to do some damage now. At least two hits were reported. Of course we don't know if these are real hits, but it's a good sign, anyway.

So Pac: Moving psat Brisbane a few sweeps went in to test the air defenses. Both Warhawks and Kittyhawks were there. Zeros got even results, losing 7 and downing 8 for the day. These were not the best KB pilots, they were the rookies. Some got experience and survived, others didn't make it. It's a good test. Once the next crop is ready I'll get anything below 60 exp out of the KB groups and move the rookies into LB Zero groups to get experience where it hurts less if they fail. A bunch should be ready in about a week.

China: At Urumchi another 1:1 DA took out 16 destroyed infantry squads. This slow bleed is good, so there's nothing left to harass us out here after the base changes hands.

West Australia: At Darwin the BA shows the expected troops here, at 214 raw AV. A DA will go tomorrow.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Darwin (76,124)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 390 troops, 24 guns, 26 vehicles, Assault Value = 659

Defending force 8252 troops, 96 guns, 45 vehicles, Assault Value = 214

Japanese ground losses:
Guns lost 3 (2 destroyed, 1 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
11 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Assaulting units:
124th Infantry Regiment
48th Division
15th Naval Guard Unit
2nd Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
16th Army
15th Ind.Art.Mortar Bn /2

Defending units:
19th Australian Battalion
Sparrow Battalion
2/4 MG Battalion
Gull Battalion
Emery Point Fortress
Northern Territory
1st Fgtr RAAF Wing
2nd RAN Base Force
A/B Battery Heavy Coastal Artillery Regiment

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Burma: In Burma Jocke left the Blenheims on airfield attack toward Myitkyina. The field is already closed down and only a few bleeding CAP Oscars intervened, only damaging about 6 of the 25. 2 ops losses reported.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

These have been more difficult to handle than I would have expected. One even shot down an Oscar, and massed they have wiped out a few fields.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by obvert -- 4/16/2012 12:52:14 PM >

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 579

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/16/2012 12:53:34 PM

Historiker

Posts: 4742
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline

quote:

subs: The KB continues to find a lot of subs in its path. The Kates are starting to do some damage now. At least two hits were reported. Of course we don't know if these are real hits, but it's a good sign, anyway.

Are your pilots trained in ASW?

The northern adventure just prooves something once more: If it isn't worth the whole KB, it's not worth a single CV either...
I hope I don't sound smart-aleck, but you seem to have proven Sun Zu's statements about knowing yourself and the enemy...

_____________________________

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 580

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/16/2012 1:12:19 PM

ny59giants

Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline

quote:

A small raiding unit of several DDs will be placed at Koumac, believed to be beyond Allied search range.

Wrong!! I built up the base due west in Australia (don't have game opened and cannot remember the name) that is north of Brisbane and based B-17E there. They can reach Koumac from there. I then had B-17E based at Suva to hit Noumea. New Calendonia was not safe.

You are entering the best year of the war (mid-42 through mid-43). The Japanese are still too strong to take on head on, but the Allied power continues to grow and are strong enough for Japan to feel some pain. The question during this time is if either side can force a decisive carrier battle.

_____________________________

(in reply to Historiker)

Post #: 581

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/16/2012 1:29:50 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

quote:

A small raiding unit of several DDs will be placed at Koumac, believed to be beyond Allied search range.

Wrong!! I built up the base due west in Australia (don't have game opened and cannot remember the name) that is north of Brisbane and based B-17E there. They can reach Koumac from there. I then had B-17E based at Suva to hit Noumea. New Calendonia was not safe.

I should say 'current' Allied search range.

Maryborough? It's 17 hexes range from Koumac. Brisbane is 19. So you're right, especially if there are any B-24s around.

I think though he's using the max 16 hex Cats from Brisbane. The 4E are definitely coming from Suva. I didn't build Noumea so the Allies would take some time with it when they got it. They pound the fields about 3 times a week now.

Koumac has no field, but can host our Rufes. 9 are there, with a 2 Emily detachment. The DDs are on patrol in harbor, so could be spotted, but not hit unless by surface forces most likely. Noumea also has 4 mini-subs and 4 MTBs patrolling at base on 1 hex react. Not much, but it's all I want to commit there.

quote:

You are entering the best year of the war (mid-42 through mid-43). The Japanese are still too strong to take on head on, but the Allied power continues to grow and are strong enough for Japan to feel some pain. The question during this time is if either side can force a decisive carrier battle.

I'm excited. As I've said, it was a shock to lose the CVEs, but it feels more like a real battle now. It's bringing more attention to everything else I do and hopefully giving me some needed caution.

< Message edited by obvert -- 4/16/2012 1:42:38 PM >

(in reply to Historiker)

Post #: 582

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/16/2012 1:31:11 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

repeat...

< Message edited by obvert -- 4/16/2012 1:33:52 PM >

(in reply to Historiker)

Post #: 583

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/16/2012 1:31:24 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker

quote:

subs: The KB continues to find a lot of subs in its path. The Kates are starting to do some damage now. At least two hits were reported. Of course we don't know if these are real hits, but it's a good sign, anyway.

Are your pilots trained in ASW?

The northern adventure just prooves something once more: If it isn't worth the whole KB, it's not worth a single CV either...
I hope I don't sound smart-aleck, but you seem to have proven Sun Zu's statements about knowing yourself and the enemy...

Ha ha, yes I have. I just keep thinking of how differently it could have gone if on the second day of battle I had made a SCTF that would have tangled with the NC (with the Chuyo speeding off into the Aleutians), and if the other SCTF I had going at the Wasp had intercepted it covered only by two DD. (I now know based on an email exchange that the Wasp did contact the group but avoided battle and sped away, twice!!! This was not shown in the replay other than a scan to the spot and a target placed there, but no message).

Anyway. Yes. Although for now I won't bring Junyo, Ryujo, Taiyo and Zuiho from Singapore over to So Pac. So the whole KB is the original 6 CVs. If the Allies want to risk a 6 on 4 battle near my LBA, I'm in for that, now that we have radar and upgraded groups.

< Message edited by obvert -- 4/16/2012 1:32:27 PM >

(in reply to Historiker)

Post #: 584

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/16/2012 1:47:12 PM

Historiker

Posts: 4742
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline

Getting into a 6 to 4 battle will mean you most likely also loose carriers. Is it worth having some carriers in Singapore loosing some in a battle in the Pacific?
What do you do with your Singapore-Carriers that justifies their presence?

I prefer the principle of massing forces, which means that the losses get smaller the more own forces you can bring.

< Message edited by Historiker -- 4/16/2012 1:51:10 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 585

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/16/2012 2:34:19 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker

Getting into a 6 to 4 battle will mean you most likely also loose carriers. Is it worth having some carriers in Singapore loosing some in a battle in the Pacific?
What do you do with your Singapore-Carriers that justifies their presence?

I prefer the principle of massing forces, which means that the losses get smaller the more own forces you can bring.

I was about to write about what I was doing with them to justify their presence. Now I'm not sure, thinking about it, that it is justified. They went there to be fixed up and upgraded. All done now.

Being my first time organizing the defense of the Empire I'm nervous about my lack of preparation. I know that the Allies could invade Sumatra now if they wanted to. But the CVs there might not even stop them. They would give them pause though.

Also, if he thinks that maybe these have gone somewhere else, Jocke might be more likely to try something without enough support.

I have always read AARs and wondered why someone would not put all of their CVs together as Japan to give the best chance of winning a CV battle. Now that I'm playing this side in a PBEM I understand, but it's probably still the most solid strategic choice.

Conceptually I don't like it. I like the idea of having two solid CV groups. It's just not possible, is it?

(in reply to Historiker)

Post #: 586

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/16/2012 2:41:02 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

Oh also. The KB Kate pilots are about 50-60 ASW now, and improving. I put them on 2,000 ft to take advantage of their high naval bombing skill. When the KB is not in action they are at 40% ASW 40% training 20% rest. When it moves I bump that to 50% ASW 10% search as they leave port, with Vals on naval attack 50% search 2k ft. Just for the area around the Solomons where the subs are concentrated.

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 587

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/16/2012 3:08:45 PM

Historiker

Posts: 4742
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker

Getting into a 6 to 4 battle will mean you most likely also loose carriers. Is it worth having some carriers in Singapore loosing some in a battle in the Pacific?
What do you do with your Singapore-Carriers that justifies their presence?

I prefer the principle of massing forces, which means that the losses get smaller the more own forces you can bring.

I was about to write about what I was doing with them to justify their presence. Now I'm not sure, thinking about it, that it is justified. They went there to be fixed up and upgraded. All done now.

Being my first time organizing the defense of the Empire I'm nervous about my lack of preparation. I know that the Allies could invade Sumatra now if they wanted to. But the CVs there might not even stop them. They would give them pause though.

Also, if he thinks that maybe these have gone somewhere else, Jocke might be more likely to try something without enough support.

I have always read AARs and wondered why someone would not put all of their CVs together as Japan to give the best chance of winning a CV battle. Now that I'm playing this side in a PBEM I understand, but it's probably still the most solid strategic choice.

Conceptually I don't like it. I like the idea of having two solid CV groups. It's just not possible, is it?

I think, the DEI/Burma area doesn't necessarily require CVs for defense. You can build a lot of airfields and have land based A6M2 over BBs and CAs going for enemy landings. So the only reason to permanently have my CVs there is to do raids. But even that doesn't require a permanent presence. If you raid regularly with only a few CVs, you get predictable and invite your opponent to intercept you.

In the Pacific, on the other hand, you have room for manueuver while you lack sufficiant airbases. So this is the playing ground for CVs.

As you said: your Singapore-CVs will likely not be enough to defend against an enemy invasion anyways. You'll need all your CVs in that case, because most opponents won't do an invasion with just a part of their CVs in that phase of the war. So when you only have parts of your CVs, it is not unlikely that he sinks the first group while being strong enough for the second group as well.

Now imagine you had massed your foces and taken the Singapore-CVs with you to the Aleutians...

< Message edited by Historiker -- 4/16/2012 3:10:38 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 588

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/16/2012 3:09:06 PM

Historiker

Posts: 4742
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

Oh also. The KB Kate pilots are about 50-60 ASW now, and improving. I put them on 2,000 ft to take advantage of their high naval bombing skill. When the KB is not in action they are at 40% ASW 40% training 20% rest. When it moves I bump that to 50% ASW 10% search as they leave port, with Vals on naval attack 50% search 2k ft. Just for the area around the Solomons where the subs are concentrated.

thx! I guess I may use that myself

_____________________________

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 589

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/16/2012 3:59:11 PM

SqzMyLemon

Posts: 4239
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

It's a tough call for me on massing the CV's and CVL's together as well, but Historiker does make a good case why they should be concentrated. And we just have to look at historic Japan to see what happens to carriers when they are delivered in bite sized morsals. I'll need to take a look at my own operations here soon and see if I could be better served doing something else with them too.

Fun game and Joc is definitely not afraid to take a risk. That was a gutsy call with WASP and the creation of the SCTF to go after you. Like you, I learn from my mistakes, so better to lose a few CVE's rather than some of the big boys.

Really enjoying your AAR and following along.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to Historiker)

Post #: 590

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/16/2012 8:09:45 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker

Getting into a 6 to 4 battle will mean you most likely also loose carriers. Is it worth having some carriers in Singapore loosing some in a battle in the Pacific?
What do you do with your Singapore-Carriers that justifies their presence?

I prefer the principle of massing forces, which means that the losses get smaller the more own forces you can bring.

I was about to write about what I was doing with them to justify their presence. Now I'm not sure, thinking about it, that it is justified. They went there to be fixed up and upgraded. All done now.

Being my first time organizing the defense of the Empire I'm nervous about my lack of preparation. I know that the Allies could invade Sumatra now if they wanted to. But the CVs there might not even stop them. They would give them pause though.

Also, if he thinks that maybe these have gone somewhere else, Jocke might be more likely to try something without enough support.

I have always read AARs and wondered why someone would not put all of their CVs together as Japan to give the best chance of winning a CV battle. Now that I'm playing this side in a PBEM I understand, but it's probably still the most solid strategic choice.

Conceptually I don't like it. I like the idea of having two solid CV groups. It's just not possible, is it?

I think, the DEI/Burma area doesn't necessarily require CVs for defense. You can build a lot of airfields and have land based A6M2 over BBs and CAs going for enemy landings. So the only reason to permanently have my CVs there is to do raids. But even that doesn't require a permanent presence. If you raid regularly with only a few CVs, you get predictable and invite your opponent to intercept you.

In the Pacific, on the other hand, you have room for manueuver while you lack sufficiant airbases. So this is the playing ground for CVs.

As you said: your Singapore-CVs will likely not be enough to defend against an enemy invasion anyways. You'll need all your CVs in that case, because most opponents won't do an invasion with just a part of their CVs in that phase of the war. So when you only have parts of your CVs, it is not unlikely that he sinks the first group while being strong enough for the second group as well.

Now imagine you had massed your foces and taken the Singapore-CVs with you to the Aleutians...

All good points. I think you have me on the CVs at Singapore. I will begin to get the sailors out of the pubs and brothels and get them back on the ships ready to get some sea time in the South Pacific.

As for the Aleutians, that's different matter entirely. I wouldn't bring all my CVs there unless I knew the Allies had committed theirs. The facts at the time were that I had just about torpedoed Lexington near Sydney. Then saw a fat transport TF near Kodiak. Went after it with the strength I had allocated to the area, 2 CVE and 1 CVL. I would not bring more unless there was a chance of a real invasion using all of the Allied CVs. Too far out of place. That would leave So Pac a mess.

I didn't know Wasp was there, but assumed it could be. He also admitted he didn't know we had CVs up there, so it could have been quite an effective surprise if they had hit just a bit harder during the first attack. I knew the three IJN small CVs could give it a run for its money if it did show, and they did. One more bomb hit, better weather during the attack, and Wasp would have been crippled. Those are the breaks of the battle I think, not in this case a mis-allocation of forces.

The mistakes came later when I didn't consider he'd send his most valuable BB with two CLAA and 2 DD against a much stronger force. I had 2 BB, 1 CA, 2 CL and 5 DD there! I simply didn't create a SCTF and it bit me in the butt. He took a risk he shouldn't have taken and I did not take into account that he would be that aggressively careless with his forces. Good on him, nice move. Now I know.

But even that turn I was in position with the other assets covering my flank to hit the unprotected Wasp. And he didn't know they were there. If he had, if the weather would have allowed his search planes to find them, they might have been toast, but the other CVE would have made it easily home.

The parts were in place, they just didn't connect with his forces because of weather, commander, something I'll never know! But they did reach his force (twice in one turn) and didn't pursue to the point of battle. I might have been able to control those things in some better way, but what I learned is that even good orders can be unsuccessful and one should always take into account the most aggressive move by one's opponent, even if it is unjustifiably risky, as the move with the NC was, IMHO.

(in reply to Historiker)

Post #: 591

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/16/2012 8:14:30 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

Oh also. The KB Kate pilots are about 50-60 ASW now, and improving. I put them on 2,000 ft to take advantage of their high naval bombing skill. When the KB is not in action they are at 40% ASW 40% training 20% rest. When it moves I bump that to 50% ASW 10% search as they leave port, with Vals on naval attack 50% search 2k ft. Just for the area around the Solomons where the subs are concentrated.

thx! I guess I may use that myself

All CV based Kate pilots get a lot of ASW training. No sitting around in port.

The past few turns, which I'll write up tonight, I had somewhere around 7 attacks on subs and 3 hits on one, sinking the Saury. I used to think the 2E IJAAF bombers were better, but I think Kates hit them harder more often, maybe due to their naval strengths or their maneuverability or something.

< Message edited by obvert -- 4/16/2012 8:15:37 PM >

(in reply to Historiker)

Post #: 592

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/16/2012 8:23:00 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

It's a tough call for me on massing the CV's and CVL's together as well, but Historiker does make a good case why they should be concentrated. And we just have to look at historic Japan to see what happens to carriers when they are delivered in bite sized morsals. I'll need to take a look at my own operations here soon and see if I could be better served doing something else with them too.

Fun game and Joc is definitely not afraid to take a risk. That was a gutsy call with WASP and the creation of the SCTF to go after you. Like you, I learn from my mistakes, so better to lose a few CVE's rather than some of the big boys.

Really enjoying your AAR and following along.

Thanks! Glad you keep stopping in.

He's got me convinced for So Pac. It does make sense.

I love that that battle happened. I now know my opponent better, know myself better, and will take both into account during the next battle. It makes it more real when you finally lose something valuable as Japan. Hopefully nothing TOO valuable, but it makes me analyse my priorities more deeply.

Everyone says it's hardest as Japan to know when you have to shift onto the defensive. Those few days made me realize I need a different attitude toward defense. I can't pull the trigger at just anything. I have to lead him in farther, make him reveal something more valuable, and then go into it with force. If I had shown the CVs, but not attacked, he might have brought Wasp in range of the Netties up there (which he still might not know are there at all) and I wouldn't have even had to risk the CVs to bag one of his.

< Message edited by obvert -- 4/16/2012 8:24:13 PM >

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 593

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/16/2012 8:30:51 PM

Historiker

Posts: 4742
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline

quote:

As for the Aleutians, that's different matter entirely. I wouldn't bring all my CVs there unless I knew the Allies had committed theirs. The facts at the time were that I had just about torpedoed Lexington near Sydney. Then saw a fat transport TF near Kodiak. Went after it with the strength I had allocated to the area, 2 CVE and 1 CVL. I would not bring more unless there was a chance of a real invasion using all of the Allied CVs. Too far out of place. That would leave So Pac a mess.

Well, it's your game.

I repeat myself, but I think if an operation isn't worth superior power, it isn't worth any power at all! I've once had one of the allied CVs in the Java sea in the first week of January 42 and it devasted the whole mini-KB. Even if the MKB is superior in numbers, a strike from just one ship can be coordinated way better than from different carriers.
Also: While allied CVs stay in fightable after a couple of hits, the Japs built their ships of paper. This should be considered as well.

I know its tempting to strike here and there. But it is worth loosing carriers against weak enemy troops? I mean, if you meet all allied CVs with all of yours and loose 3 or 5 CVs, it is fair and part of the deal. But loosing CVEs and CVLs against a single CV?
Again: What had happened if the Singapore Carriers had been with them? Would've been better?

I know, my postings might be annoying, but I hope you forgive me.

_____________________________

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 594

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/16/2012 9:21:47 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker

quote:

As for the Aleutians, that's different matter entirely. I wouldn't bring all my CVs there unless I knew the Allies had committed theirs. The facts at the time were that I had just about torpedoed Lexington near Sydney. Then saw a fat transport TF near Kodiak. Went after it with the strength I had allocated to the area, 2 CVE and 1 CVL. I would not bring more unless there was a chance of a real invasion using all of the Allied CVs. Too far out of place. That would leave So Pac a mess.

Well, it's your game.

I repeat myself, but I think if an operation isn't worth superior power, it isn't worth any power at all! I've once had one of the allied CVs in the Java sea in the first week of January 42 and it devasted the whole mini-KB. Even if the MKB is superior in numbers, a strike from just one ship can be coordinated way better than from different carriers.
Also: While allied CVs stay in fightable after a couple of hits, the Japs built their ships of paper. This should be considered as well.

I know its tempting to strike here and there. But it is worth loosing carriers against weak enemy troops? I mean, if you meet all allied CVs with all of yours and loose 3 or 5 CVs, it is fair and part of the deal. But loosing CVEs and CVLs against a single CV?
Again: What had happened if the Singapore Carriers had been with them? Would've been better?

I know, my postings might be annoying, but I hope you forgive me.

These are not annoying at ALL. I love the criticism. That's what makes me think. You must be an academic!

As a teacher and an artist, criticism and using mistakes to improve learning and production is integral to everything I do. Keep it coming.

What I know about Wasp influenced my evaluation of the situation. 16 belt armor? 37 deck armor? Only 27 Wildcats. One problem was that my planes flew their first mission against the transports. So several Vals and Kates, and 1 zero were lost.

I still had more fighters both on offense and on defense during the critical day plus equal strike aircraft and they just didn't perform. Maybe tired. They let Wildcats get to the Vals and couldn't get through to the SBDs. But they were perfectly coordinated in terms of arrival times. Weather could have been a factor. He had clear sky for his. I had overcast. Those are the breaks.

Shoho has been a trooper by the way. She's taken two 1,000 pounders and a torp and made it back to base. Unusual I know.

The CVs at Singapore couldn't have made it by the time this all happened. They just finished repairing about a week before. So even if I had allocated them there, things would have turned out the same.

These were valuable, but somewhat expendable assets. I don't believe CVEs belong in the KB. They slow it down. That could be more detrimental to the whole than beneficial.

< Message edited by obvert -- 4/16/2012 9:23:07 PM >

(in reply to Historiker)

Post #: 595

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/16/2012 9:24:22 PM

Mike Solli

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

Shoho has been a trooper by the way. She's taken two 1,000 pounders and a torp and made it back to base. Unusual I know.

Historically, she took quite a pounding before she went under considering how small she is.

_____________________________

Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 596

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/16/2012 9:48:15 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

Shoho has been a trooper by the way. She's taken two 1,000 pounders and a torp and made it back to base. Unusual I know.

Historically, she took quite a pounding before she went under considering how small she is.

Yeah, I was just looking and realized she has almost no armor. Just 5/5/0! Amazing she is floating.

(in reply to Mike Solli)

Post #: 597

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/16/2012 10:56:36 PM

Historiker

Posts: 4742
Joined: 7/4/2007
From: Deutschland
Status: offline

quote:

These are not annoying at ALL. I love the criticism. That's what makes me think. You must be an academic!

What do you mean by that? How do you reach that conclusion?

My experience is, that every single US CV can take the initioal MKB head on, even if it still has Buffalos! That's why I only plan to use them in combat when they are with the big boys.

_____________________________

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 598

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/16/2012 11:32:07 PM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Historiker

quote:

These are not annoying at ALL. I love the criticism. That's what makes me think. You must be an academic!

What do you mean by that? How do you reach that conclusion?

My experience is, that every single US CV can take the initioal MKB head on, even if it still has Buffalos! That's why I only plan to use them in combat when they are with the big boys.

I just mean someone for whom debate, even difficult or challenging debate, is profitable and even enjoyable.

(in reply to Historiker)

Post #: 599

RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A) - 4/17/2012 12:34:39 AM

obvert

Posts: 14050
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

23 July 1942
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

subs: I-4 is sighted near Lahaina by Bancroft, but no attacks today. A CHa calls in to report that Grouper is stationed near the HI.

China: Aside from all of this silly stuff happening thousands of miles away on some distant ocean, the IJA is still pushing forward in China. Today there was finally enough supply to attack at Chengtu. The wait was rewarded with a lowering of forts to 1 and a 1:1 attack!

One Brigade was trashed, and a Tank Rgt won't fight again this week. But all in all, not a bad result. The blocking units near Chunking will give up their armor units to the next attack, and a Brigade will move in from Neikiang. After some healing and the shuffling of forces, the next attack should be able to scrape up about 4,400-4,500 AV. Assuming we recoup losses faster and can go before his reinforcements arrive, this could be enough to break through. It needs to be enough to break through. The question is; "Can I risk a shock attack?"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Chengtu (75,41)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 123950 troops, 1116 guns, 1031 vehicles, Assault Value = 4730

Defending force 64418 troops, 554 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 2472

Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 1

Japanese adjusted assault: 3907

Allied adjusted defense: 2553

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 1 (fort level 1)

Japanese Assault reduces fortifications to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), forts(+), preparation(-), experience(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
7598 casualties reported
Squads: 25 destroyed, 790 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 88 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 124 disabled
Vehicles lost 183 (19 destroyed, 164 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
6181 casualties reported
Squads: 62 destroyed, 595 disabled
Non Combat: 5 destroyed, 90 disabled
Engineers: 9 destroyed, 96 disabled
Guns lost 70 (3 destroyed, 67 disabled)

Assaulting units:
3rd Tank Regiment
3rd Ind.Mixed Brigade
1st Ind.Mixed Brigade
8th Ind.Mixed Brigade
5th Tank Regiment
59th Infantry Brigade
13th Indpt Infantry Regiment
27th Division
10th Tank Regiment
36th Division
110th Division
15th Division
11th Tank Regiment
5th Ind.Mixed Brigade
1st Engineer Regiment
12th Tank Regiment
9th Ind.Mixed Brigade
9th Tank Regiment
37th Division
35th Division
26th Engineer Regiment
51st Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion
11th Army
14th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
2nd Ind. Mountain Gun Regiment
China Expeditionary Army
1st Mortar Battalion
North China Area Army
52nd Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion
1st Army
6th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
12th Army
15th Ind.Medium Field Artillery Regiment
11th Field Artillery Regiment

Defending units:
95th Chinese Corps
8th Route Army
41st Chinese Corps
35th Chinese Corps
3rd Chinese Cavalry Corps
98th Chinese Corps
3rd Prov Chinese Corps
66th Chinese Corps
43rd Chinese Corps
61st Chinese Corps
34th Chinese Corps
3rd Chinese Base Force

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

At Urumchi the tanks finally break through and take the base. This is great. Mission accomplished. Two tank units will chase the stragglers, trying to kill them off. The other free tank unit will form the garrison for now. A small AF Coy will be flown in.

I've heard this oil won't flow to the rest of China, but it's worth a try, right?

West Australia: At Darwin another DA goes ahead and Tokyo Rose chimes in after a long absence. Good to hear her voice. The remains will have to be chased down here as well.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Darwin (76,124)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 18311 troops, 229 guns, 68 vehicles, Assault Value = 558

Defending force 7846 troops, 91 guns, 45 vehicles, Assault Value = 160

Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 1

Japanese adjusted assault: 823

Allied adjusted defense: 143

Japanese assault odds: 5 to 1 (fort level 1)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Darwin !!!

Combat modifiers
Defender: leaders(+)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
955 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 55 disabled
Non Combat: 3 destroyed, 9 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 20 (2 destroyed, 18 disabled)
Vehicles lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
3449 casualties reported
Squads: 79 destroyed, 40 disabled
Non Combat: 207 destroyed, 46 disabled
Engineers: 47 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 92 (83 destroyed, 9 disabled)
Vehicles lost 36 (35 destroyed, 1 disabled)
Units retreated 7
Units destroyed 2

Defeated Allied Units Retreating!

Assaulting units:
124th Infantry Regiment
48th Division
15th Naval Guard Unit
56th Field Artillery Regiment
16th Army
2nd Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
15th Ind.Art.Mortar Bn /2

Defending units:
Sparrow Battalion
Gull Battalion
19th Australian Battalion
2/4 MG Battalion
Emery Point Fortress
Northern Territory
2nd RAN Base Force
1st Fgtr RAAF Wing
A/B Battery Heavy Coastal Artillery Regiment

------------------------------------------------------------------------

So Pac: The KB Kates hit SS Saury three times! I hear later from Jocke that it was sunk! The first confirmed ASW air kill. Several more are attacked throughout the day. The KB winds its way back to Tulagi.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by obvert -- 4/18/2012 8:07:43 PM >

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 600

Page: << < prev 18 19 [20] 21 22 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Wild Sheep's Chase - obvert (J) vs JocMeister (A)