RE: Wild Sheep Chase

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 Chase

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 Chase

Page: << < prev 71 72 [73] 74 75 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/8/2013 6:18:11 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: fcharton

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert
Am I wrong in thinking there is something gamey with this? It seems I've heard of other instances of players trying this and it being called out as not quite right there, but I can't remember in what games now. It certainly doesn't feel like a usual tactic that I see a lot.

So what do you all think?

It is not quite right, but it somehow makes some sense. The game lacks a probe/patrol, or some form of precise recon you get when you're in contact with the enemy, and bombardment plays this role.

Right now, if you don't bombard, you can be in the same hex as an enemy stack and not know its strength until you commit to a full fledged attack. If you are on the other side of a river, then you even need to shock attack (ie cross in strength) to get this information.

As such, I would say it is legit, even though having to use artillery units to do this seems extremely strange.

Francois

After thinking about this further it seems even worse than at first. I see what you're saying there, but from the air (recon) you already get numbers of troops, guns and vehicles. If you bomb you get individual unit names, usually most of them over the course of several mission.

This gives all of that plus actual strength and potentially more (combat factors like supply, leaders, etc). The whole point of defending a river crossing is to defend the crossing, so it's pretty unlikely a scouting party would make it through the entire Japanese army counting units and men and machines and assessing their combat strength as they got blown back to the other side.

Don't you also force the entire Japanese army to expend supplies to fight off this attack by one arty unit?

From the air you get numbers but not how many are combat and how many are support. If you bomb you get individual unit names. If there's a beef with the engine this would be the one IMO. How a pilot at 15,000 can see unit crests is beyond me. One ID looks pretty much like another.

This is a bombardment due to the attacking LCU type, so he's not going to get a read on fort levels, leaders, etc. If he had sent a small infantry unit--say a fragment of a para--would you have the same problem? The Allies had recon specific ground forces. That's what UDTs were at sea, and Marine Force Recon was and still is. Other nations had similar.

I don't know if the entire defense stack fires, or if they stop the loop when the attacker is 100% dead. I suspect the latter, but I don't know.

I'm down with the idea that the game lacks a Probe attack type. These have been wargame staples for generations. Don't know why GG left this out, especially in a small unit war like the PTO. But he also left out submarine photo recon, another staple of island hopping. If there's a "huh" here it's sending a no AV unit across a river to die. But maybe there's no huh even there. You got the VPs at no risk to your own balance. He got info. But you got some too--he's probing in advance of a crossing most probably. Would you prefer no warning and let him have the VPs back? Trade-off.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 2161

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/8/2013 6:43:11 PM

obvert

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

Well, the unit retreated back to the other side! So no VPs! I'm sure he intended that it would get obliterated, but this leaves no redeeming factor for my side.

So that is also what makes me think we used a full round of ammo on this little venture.

I agree there could be some features like this in game, but as there are not it just fells wrong to get everything so easily, even if it's a small raider unit or something of that sort. I know that's what they would have been used for but they likely wouldn't have surveyed the entire front and known everything. It's true he doesn't get forts, but I'm sure he knows I have level 6 at least as he never bombed the base and let me build it as I pleased.

Considering what is here this is miles and miles of front, and having accurate knowledge of what is here means he can make a highly informed decision on whether to cross with his huge stack or not.

< Message edited by obvert -- 9/8/2013 6:47:31 PM >

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 2162

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/8/2013 7:25:21 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

Well, the unit retreated back to the other side! So no VPs! I'm sure he intended that it would get obliterated, but this leaves no redeeming factor for my side.

So that is also what makes me think we used a full round of ammo on this little venture.

I agree there could be some features like this in game, but as there are not it just fells wrong to get everything so easily, even if it's a small raider unit or something of that sort. I know that's what they would have been used for but they likely wouldn't have surveyed the entire front and known everything. It's true he doesn't get forts, but I'm sure he knows I have level 6 at least as he never bombed the base and let me build it as I pleased.

Considering what is here this is miles and miles of front, and having accurate knowledge of what is here means he can make a highly informed decision on whether to cross with his huge stack or not.

You destroyed three guns. They're devices. You get VPs for them.

Ammo? Probably did expend a full round then, at least a full round from counter-battery devices. I doubt the infantry units shot back at a bombardment. They don't when it's intra-hex and not a crossing. What commander wouldn't shoot at an enemy reconning his position with everything he has?

As for front size versus men I think you can't be a little pregnant on this issue. A 40-mile front isn't going to be reconned in a single day by a brigade. The hex size works in all sorts of ways, good and bad, and can't be applied to real world things like this. Else the common argument that a Level 9 AF is several over a region, and not one the size of JFK, easily located at night at 9000 feet doesn't work either? Right?

By using a no-AV unit he avoids the shock attack and sure vaporization of his force, yes. But he also lost three guns which are more rare in the device pool than three squads of infantry.

As for him not getting +/- readings, you're waffling, man. He doesn't get them from a bombardment. He gets them from any infantry incursion. Here he didn't get them. So do you when you do the same thing. As I said, if you want to be upset about "easy info" look at bombing. There wouldn't even be a damage report without a follow-on BDA mission, let alone the attacker knowing the exact OOB on the ground at 300 kts. But the game doesn't have numerous other real world intel sources from tactical sigint to prisoner interrogation, so it cuts corners.

Picture having to plan and execute BDA missions for every bomb run. Hair-pulling.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 2163

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/8/2013 7:37:42 PM

obvert

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

Ok. Three VPs!

I get what you're saying, but lets extrapolate. What if the Japanese did this early in Singers to decide what they actually needed to bring there? Or anywhere else there is a river crossing, like in China?

Anyone else have an opinion?

PS - I opened up a thread on the main forum just to see what others thought. I know I might be so in the thick of the game that I am not seeing clearly, but I also think not many Allied players read this AAR and it would be interesting to see all sides comment on this.

< Message edited by obvert -- 9/8/2013 8:09:45 PM >

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 2164

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/8/2013 9:36:12 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

Ok. Three VPs!

I get what you're saying, but lets extrapolate. What if the Japanese did this early in Singers to decide what they actually needed to bring there? Or anywhere else there is a river crossing, like in China?

Anyone else have an opinion?

PS - I opened up a thread on the main forum just to see what others thought. I know I might be so in the thick of the game that I am not seeing clearly, but I also think not many Allied players read this AAR and it would be interesting to see all sides comment on this.

Actually, as I read the rule, it's one VP.

Other opinions are good. I just think that falling back on "it's a 40 mile hex" opens you up to counter arguments. When anything crosses the 40 mile hex every LCU defender in it has perfect knowledge of the incursion instantly and can fight back. Every LCU is assumed to be at every pixel of the hex at every moment. Weather in every pixel is exactly the same. If there's a road in the hex it must be 40-miles wide because supply flows everywhere as if it were. There's only one terrain modifier per 40 miles. Rivers are about 10-miels wide. Every AA gun in the hex has a chance to fire at anything that breaks a hex side. Etc.

I also offer my standard retort to "gamey": you can do it too. If you have a lot of arty to spare, or base force frags, go for it. Tactical intel is far more important to Japan in this era than it is for the Allies.

Edit: As far as Singers, etc. goes I think the Japanese ability to massively bomb in the opening moths gives them as big a read as they need to know what's in Singers. A no AV attack doesn't give them forts. If they want to throw away an AV unit I can't say they don't deserve fort/leader/prep info. And I can't think of anything an Allied player would or should do differently at Singers if Japan had this info.

< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 9/8/2013 9:40:14 PM >

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 2165

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/8/2013 10:25:42 PM

obvert

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

Ok. Three VPs!

I get what you're saying, but lets extrapolate. What if the Japanese did this early in Singers to decide what they actually needed to bring there? Or anywhere else there is a river crossing, like in China?

Anyone else have an opinion?

PS - I opened up a thread on the main forum just to see what others thought. I know I might be so in the thick of the game that I am not seeing clearly, but I also think not many Allied players read this AAR and it would be interesting to see all sides comment on this.

Actually, as I read the rule, it's one VP.

Other opinions are good. I just think that falling back on "it's a 40 mile hex" opens you up to counter arguments. When anything crosses the 40 mile hex every LCU defender in it has perfect knowledge of the incursion instantly and can fight back. Every LCU is assumed to be at every pixel of the hex at every moment. Weather in every pixel is exactly the same. If there's a road in the hex it must be 40-miles wide because supply flows everywhere as if it were. There's only one terrain modifier per 40 miles. Rivers are about 10-miels wide. Every AA gun in the hex has a chance to fire at anything that breaks a hex side. Etc.

I also offer my standard retort to "gamey": you can do it too. If you have a lot of arty to spare, or base force frags, go for it. Tactical intel is far more important to Japan in this era than it is for the Allies.

Edit: As far as Singers, etc. goes I think the Japanese ability to massively bomb in the opening moths gives them as big a read as they need to know what's in Singers. A no AV attack doesn't give them forts. If they want to throw away an AV unit I can't say they don't deserve fort/leader/prep info. And I can't think of anything an Allied player would or should do differently at Singers if Japan had this info.

I get what you're saying. There are a lot of abstracts involved. Is one unit crossing for the purpose of gaining information taking advantage of those abstracts, though? That's what I'm asking.

Pretty sure I know what you're thinking!

I might come around to the same thing, but I just want to here both sides if there are two sides.

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 2166

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/8/2013 10:51:18 PM

Cpt Sherwood

Posts: 837
Joined: 12/1/2005
From: A Very Nice Place in the USA
Status: offline

I am pretty much in agreement with Bullwinkle, nothing new here, nothing to see, continue on. There are a lot of abstractions and any number of missing mechanisms. I don't really see any big problem here.

_____________________________

�Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.� ― Lucius Annaeus Seneca

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 2167

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/8/2013 11:13:53 PM

obvert

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cpt Sherwood

I am pretty much in agreement with Bullwinkle, nothing new here, nothing to see, continue on. There are a lot of abstractions and any number of missing mechanisms. I don't really see any big problem here.

In this case I've been seeing a general trend toward taking more liberties with the game and with our understandings about how we've decided to play the game coming lately from the Allied side. The night bombing was a huge surprise after his comments in my other game about my opponent there wanting to use it. Jocke said, "why doesn't he just do like everyone else" and bomb in daylight?

So there is inconsistency and I sense even a growing antagonism at times in what has been (what I thought anyway) a great partnership in playing this game. This is one reason I'm not keeping this in the AAR. I want a public understanding to come out, either way it's eventually focused, which I think will make more of an impression than my feelings alone, even if this is not seen as a big deal by anyone else.

Part of this also is that I believe we have too much info on the other side's dispositions already. This just wasn't possible in this war. Recon was great for the Allies and is modeled well here as much better than that of the Japanese. Sigint was great and that is modeled as well. Knowing ALL units and what is here or not in a river crossing that is highly risky seems too much.

We started this game saying we wanted to play in a way that seemed plausible for the WW2 era and I've made quite a few concessions to accommodate that over time. So has he. Now it feels like due to the time getting short maybe there is less emphasis on this? Not sure.

< Message edited by obvert -- 9/8/2013 11:19:14 PM >

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to Cpt Sherwood)

Post #: 2168

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/9/2013 1:53:41 AM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

Ok. Three VPs!

I get what you're saying, but lets extrapolate. What if the Japanese did this early in Singers to decide what they actually needed to bring there? Or anywhere else there is a river crossing, like in China?

Anyone else have an opinion?

PS - I opened up a thread on the main forum just to see what others thought. I know I might be so in the thick of the game that I am not seeing clearly, but I also think not many Allied players read this AAR and it would be interesting to see all sides comment on this.

Actually, as I read the rule, it's one VP.

Other opinions are good. I just think that falling back on "it's a 40 mile hex" opens you up to counter arguments. When anything crosses the 40 mile hex every LCU defender in it has perfect knowledge of the incursion instantly and can fight back. Every LCU is assumed to be at every pixel of the hex at every moment. Weather in every pixel is exactly the same. If there's a road in the hex it must be 40-miles wide because supply flows everywhere as if it were. There's only one terrain modifier per 40 miles. Rivers are about 10-miels wide. Every AA gun in the hex has a chance to fire at anything that breaks a hex side. Etc.

I also offer my standard retort to "gamey": you can do it too. If you have a lot of arty to spare, or base force frags, go for it. Tactical intel is far more important to Japan in this era than it is for the Allies.

Edit: As far as Singers, etc. goes I think the Japanese ability to massively bomb in the opening moths gives them as big a read as they need to know what's in Singers. A no AV attack doesn't give them forts. If they want to throw away an AV unit I can't say they don't deserve fort/leader/prep info. And I can't think of anything an Allied player would or should do differently at Singers if Japan had this info.

I get what you're saying. There are a lot of abstracts involved. Is one unit crossing for the purpose of gaining information taking advantage of those abstracts, though? That's what I'm asking.

Pretty sure I know what you're thinking!

I might come around to the same thing, but I just want to here both sides if there are two sides.

I'm slowly wearing you down! Come to the Light Side of the Gamey Force!!!

I posted in the other thread; probably get told I'm a mean, nasty troll or something. I can't help it if I've had good negotiation teachers and hung out with a lot of lawyers. Or read all of Robert Heinlein.

I like your approach to the game because even when we disagree you keep trying to find a path to meet. I think you're a teacher? So is my wife and that approach is at the core of a lot of education processes. I come from business. There it's more about the facts and the nums. If you want to borrow my factory to co-pack snack foods the contract is going to specify times, prices, and limits. It's not going to say "You can use it in a spirit of compromise, and if we disagree we should drink tea together until each is happy, or the unicorns visit, whichever comes first."

"Gamey" is unicorn-speak. It has no definition. It's all subjective and quite often emotional. And there's no need. Just play the game as is. If you were playing chess would you allow your opponent to say "I don't think you really need both knights. It makes me sad when you're that powerful. Please take one off the board."?

So, in that spirit, if you think using this one unit to do a recon is out of line, what limit would need to be met before you would stop feeling this way? Exact numbers please. Because if you can't spec it out that way all you're doing is forcing your opponent to loop back until you agree you're now not unhappy, and please pour that unicorn another cup, will you?

< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 9/9/2013 1:56:40 AM >

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 2169

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/9/2013 2:27:21 AM

obvert

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

It's not about numbers for me. I responded in the other thread and told you that if people play differently than you that doesn't mean their unicorn is invisible. Try looking up Elasmotherium.

Gamey is what two people (or more) decide between them. I'm not interested in simple right and wrong. They don't exist in human culture. That's why even the most heinous criminals still get trials and why lawyers actually still defend them. We are social to learn and we learn to improve our situation.

So I simply disagree with you fundamentally. I could play a game of WITP with no rules easily. I'd quite enjoy it. That however is not this game with Jocke. We've decided on a certain way of playing and we're working through that.

In this case if Jocke had found less than what he did he likely would have launched across with all 500k of his army. That would mean I would lose some units outright and likely get a bunch of others trashed. Maybe even have my whole stack pushed around.

As is I get to move out of the hex because I got lucky I switched my divisions to combat mode movement. Now I'll get a head start and likely make the road blockade before he can either fully catch up or move to flank with enough to make a difference.

As to how much constitutes too much, I haven't even decided if this is something that is an exploit. I'd like Jocke to be involved in that but first I wanted to be able to see what others came up with on both sides.

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 2170

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/9/2013 3:00:45 AM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

It's not about numbers for me. I responded in the other thread and told you that if people play differently than you that doesn't mean their unicorn is invisible. Try looking up Elasmotherium.

I did. New learning for me. Yet, this is not a unicorn. I don't think it pooped gold coins or had ultimate-healing silver blood.

Gamey is what two people (or more) decide between them.

I'm still waiting, in an AE sense, for this to happen.

I'm not interested in simple right and wrong.

Those are subjective terms. I'm trying to keep to objective. The code.

Look, I play with no HRs. Two issues have come up in our game where Mike wanted to do the "let's discuss" thing and I did not want to do so. I was very clear when I proposed the game what I wanted to do in this regard.

BUT. Just because I could do some things does not mean I do them. I could wear a ball gown and slippers to the grocery store---perfectly legal--but I choose not to. My own internal reasons, not imposed on me externally by law. And it's a vital distinction that they are MY internal reasons. Mike can't tell me I MUST wear a ball gown because it's not illegal to do so. And were it illegal to do so I don't want him to tell me that either. I want the Law (the code) to do it.

They don't exist in human culture. That's why even the most heinous criminals still get trials and why lawyers actually still defend them. We are social to learn and we learn to improve our situation.

I don't disagree, except that at its core the criminal adversarial system is base don objective beliefs expressed through subjective filters by the triers-of-fact, be they jury or judge. Ultimately the subjective conclusions on the facts must be measured against an objective standard ("beyond a reasonable doubt".) The jury is NOT charged by the judge to "do as you feel."

So I simply disagree with you fundamentally. I could play a game of WITP with no rules easily. I'd quite enjoy it. That however is not this game with Jocke. We've decided on a certain way of playing and we're working through that.

I understand you're trying. I read both sides so I can't say much. But this general topic has been discussed on both sides, and for a long time there has been a series of beefs about this and that re "gamey". You're in a better position than any of us to know if these cases have been trending one way or another.

In this case if Jocke had found less than what he did he likely would have launched across with all 500k of his army. That would mean I would lose some units outright and likely get a bunch of others trashed. Maybe even have my whole stack pushed around.

I'm sure you're right. But this event shouldn't be broken down on this particular case or fact set. Whether it was good for him or good for you. That to me seems to be much of the basis for the over-arching structure of both "gamey" debates as well as HRs in general.

As is I get to move out of the hex because I got lucky I switched my divisions to combat mode movement. Now I'll get a head start and likely make the road blockade before he can either fully catch up or move to flank with enough to make a difference.

As to how much constitutes too much, I haven't even decided if this is something that is an exploit. I'd like Jocke to be involved in that but first I wanted to be able to see what others came up with on both sides.

As I've said, I think before you can ask whether this is an "exploit", first you have to define what "this" is. Back to my asking what exactly would constitute a "no-complaints" probe/recon? As one Supreme Court justice once famously said "I recognize pornography when I see it", some things can't be defined in objective terms. This is easier than pornography. But setting that level, in whatever way you do, is the first step to examining if "this" was "that", or not.

< Message edited by Bullwinkle58 -- 9/9/2013 3:03:16 AM >

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 2171

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/9/2013 7:24:51 AM

obvert

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

Yeah, so Jocke's response basically confirmed what I had been thinking, so my gamble told me what I need to know. Jocke is still bitter about various things he perceives were 'unfair' in our game. The losing a 1,000 planes in the Marianas comment makes that clear. Not sure how it's not fair to have ships fleeing his closing CVs at my own base is something 'unfair.' I told him he should have closed the airfields, and ever since then he has taken that to heart.

Maybe you're right Bull, and two people can't go through a game this long without getting too testy to actually figure this stuff out reasonably. Sigh.

So now he wants to just play, apparently without actually explaining what he was doing or if this is a mistake.

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 2172

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/9/2013 8:58:02 AM

fcharton

Posts: 1112
Joined: 10/4/2010
From: France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert
So now he wants to just play, apparently without actually explaining what he was doing or if this is a mistake.

He did explain in the other thread you started that it was a mistake. Like others, I think the best is to let it go and just play, and be ready for a new crisis in a couple of weeks... There's just too much bad blood to try to discuss things. Just play, let things get forgotten, and see where it all ends.

Also, keep in mind that the Allies have more to lose to a premature ending than you. You've seen most of the war, and now, you're just trying to manage with what is left of your empire. He, on the other hand, now has all his tools, in almost unlimited numbers, and can plan lots of big moves.

Francois

< Message edited by fcharton -- 9/9/2013 9:08:41 AM >

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 2173

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/9/2013 2:59:55 PM

PaxMondo

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

Kinda cheesy move (sending an arty unit for recon) but then, its just him being lazy. Truth is, if he read his intel reports, he would already know +80% of your units at that location. Allied intel over time is incredible. Intel Monkey would give it to him. So, this one I let slide, but I wouldn't like it.

One arty unit would not be able to recon a 40 mile perimeter ... not even one real recon unit could do that. I suspect that is why Gary didn't put one in ... to hard to figure out what the recon unit would and would not be able to see.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to fcharton)

Post #: 2174

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/9/2013 3:23:25 PM

obvert

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: fcharton

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert
So now he wants to just play, apparently without actually explaining what he was doing or if this is a mistake.

He did explain in the other thread you started that it was a mistake. Like others, I think the best is to let it go and just play, and be ready for a new crisis in a couple of weeks... There's just too much bad blood to try to discuss things. Just play, let things get forgotten, and see where it all ends.

Also, keep in mind that the Allies have more to lose to a premature ending than you. You've seen most of the war, and now, you're just trying to manage with what is left of your empire. He, on the other hand, now has all his tools, in almost unlimited numbers, and can plan lots of big moves.

Francois

You're most likely right. I did apologize for presuming, but told him I did because he's usually so good about mentioning oddities in game. I guess he was just very busy and tired. We all get there. A bit like how I feel after being up late watching the beginning of the NFL season last night!

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Kinda cheesy move (sending an arty unit for recon) but then, its just him being lazy. Truth is, if he read his intel reports, he would already know +80% of your units at that location. Allied intel over time is incredible. Intel Monkey would give it to him. So, this one I let slide, but I wouldn't like it.

One arty unit would not be able to recon a 40 mile perimeter ... not even one real recon unit could do that. I suspect that is why Gary didn't put one in ... to hard to figure out what the recon unit would and would not be able to see.

Yeah, it was a mistake. He's just so good at mentioning any strangeness in game or unusual moves that when he didn't I assumed it was intentional. The real issue for me (which I couldn't exactly say in the main forum) is that one day later and he would have found only about 10 units for 900 AV here!

This turn it all moves out. Giving up Moulmein as it can't draw supplies and I want to run these back as fast as possible. He's wary of air strikes I think after losing 30+ 4E in two days the last time he tried here, so we should be able to make a clear getaway. If not it'll be 11-12k AV Allied against 5.5k IJA with a lot of extra heavy arty in a +2 hex. I should be fine for one or two attacks in those conditions until getting to the +3 territory.

He may not chase though. I should then have to send a few divisions up to Raheng to block that crossing and force him to chance a shock or move around.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 2175

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/9/2013 3:33:05 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

Speaking of the NFL lucky you get to see the Vikings play in London in about a month. Not so lucky for the Vikes. It's a brutal trip in mid-season.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 2176

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/9/2013 3:36:07 PM

obvert

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

Speaking of the NFL lucky you get to see the Vikings play in London in about a month. Not so lucky for the Vikes. It's a brutal trip in mid-season.

We get two games this year. Can't wait to see Adrian Peterson! We can get tickets through a former parent at the school who is now the head of security for the NFL. It's fun to see at Wembley, but I miss the local fans at games in the States. not really a home game for anyone over here.

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 2177

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/9/2013 3:41:05 PM

Bullwinkle58

Posts: 11302
Joined: 2/24/2009
Status: offline

Yeah, as I was saying to Mike, who is a big Bears fan, the Vikes have a brutal schedule this year due to London. I think they said during the game yesterday it's the worst NFL schedule in 60 years. Open with two road games, London, and twice have two road games back to back. Never play back-to-back home games during the whole season.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 2178

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/9/2013 5:18:44 PM

SqzMyLemon

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

Hi Erik,

It's a long game and this kind of stuff will come up. I get the way you both are trying to play, but don't let the game's shortfalls derail things at this point.

I bitched and moaned to Jocke about ASW in DaBabes until he essentially said get over it or drop the game. In this case he was right. It is what it is and I realized I was picking the wrong fight. Other than my usual Japanese ASW sucks comments in my AAR, I don't mention it to Jocke anymore. In fact, I don't mention the game hardly at all. I stick to small talk about things non-game related and leave the replays to do my game talking for me. I know you two have developed a good rapport about the game and that's a good thing. I generally just don't enjoy discussing the game anymore and trying to figure out why something went wrong...again.

I think so many issues come up game wise that trying to discuss them all with your opponent can lead to some tension at times. I'm starting to think the solution is to indeed play on, warts and all. Trying to HR every aspect of this game that doesn't model reality well is a recipe for angst and frustration. I wish it was otherwise, but I've decided to just play and take whatever my opponents do in stride rather than point out all the little issues that occur over the course of years.

Keep up the good fight and don't sweat the small stuff. Just keep getting your shots in and enjoy the end game!

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

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

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 2179

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/9/2013 9:55:57 PM

obvert

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

Thanks Joseph. It's just been a tense few days in and out of game so I think it got to me. I should have spoken to him first and now I should just be quiet for a bit.

It's exciting in game though. Looking forward to the new aircraft. Getting above 31k at last will be nice with the Frank r. The Sam is days away. If I can get this stack back I might be able to send them to Indochina, China and Formosa as well as other spots in the home island defensive sphere. If it comes about I might have to call it a "Delayed Hive."

All credit to Cruft.

The more pressing matter is now getting troops back and continuing to shore up Luzon, the Bonins, Okinawa and Formosa. Although the north is a backwater I might want to think about getting more to Hokkaido too. Ahhhhhh!! Too much to do!

So. Back to planning.

< Message edited by obvert -- 9/9/2013 10:49:15 PM >

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 2180

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/9/2013 10:40:49 PM

obvert

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

3 - 4 November, 1944
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

SUBS: A few subs continue to circle around the Allied fleet but no more hits.

DEI: Balikpapan is heading downhill fast. Bombardments are too strong to sustain strength long. In spite of 6 forts the clear hex renders the place undefendable. Good to know for the future. There are many other clear hex areas I may have to consider building farther than 6 forts to have a chance.

PI: B-29s night bomb manpower at Manila causing 250k fires. So much for supply production here.

S DEI: Some shipping is moving up to Lautem or onward. Not sure yet. I've got strike planes at Soerabaja but they're mostly knocked around after Balikpapan so I'll wait this out whatever it is.

BURMA: Troops leave Moulmein hex abandoned tomorrow. This is dicey for a few days. If we get to the slow roads and move en masse toward Bangkok I think most of the carnage will be avoided. I'll not LR CAP because I have to have Bangkok strong to absorb anything once they get in the area and need to move into strat mode or defend the base. Jocke's troops are still showing movement to the jungle hex next to Moulmein.

CENTRAL PACFIC: I've been flying some stuff off of Rota to Agrigan, which hasn't been reconned lately. It would be nice to get a few units back from here. Pagan and Rota are both stacked.

Saipan units are mostly gone, and Jocke is cleaning up with tanks. A lot of these will be rebuilt, sent to areas around the HI after getting mostly filled out in Tokyo. A lot of PPs will be spent. I still have an arty unit to buy as well from Fusan to complete one more division for Luzon.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR November 3, 44
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Night Time Surface Combat, near Tinian at 107,94, Range 11,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
xAK Koyu Maru
xAK Syunsei Maru
xAK Wakatu Maru

Allied Ships
YMS-314
YMS-114
YMS-131
YMS-132

Improved night sighting under 89% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Partly Cloudy Conditions and 89% moonlight: 11,000 yards
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 11,000 yards
Japanese TF attempts to evade combat
Range increases to 12,000 yards...
Both Task Forces evade combat

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Balikpapan at 64,97, Range 30,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
CL Kinu, heavy damage

Allied Ships
BB California
BB Mississippi
BB Prince of Wales
DE Arrow
DE Electra
DE Encounter
DE James E. Craig
DMS Southard
DMS Hopkins
APA W.A. Holbrook
APA American Legion
APA Fuller
APA Barnett
APA President Monroe
APA President Polk
APA Arthur Middleton
APA George Clymer
APA Monrovia
APA Calvert
APA Frederick Funston
APA James O'Hara
APA Feland
APA Ormsby
APA Pierce
APA Sheridan
APA Wayne
APA Baxter
APA La Salle
APA Comet
APA John Land
APA Golden City
APA Winged Arrow
APA Starlight
AKA Artemis
AKA Arneb
AKA Chara
AKA Capricornus
AKA Medea
AKA Diphda
AKA Arcturus
AKA Procyon
AKA Castor
LSD Epping Forest
LCI-66
LCI-67
LCI-68
LCI-69
LCI(G)-76
LCI(G)-77
LCI(G)-78
LCI(G)-79
LCI(G)-80
LCI(G)-81
LCI(G)-82
LCI(G)-220

Improved night sighting under 89% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Partly Cloudy Conditions and 89% moonlight: 11,000 yards
Range increases to 30,000 yards...
Range increases to 30,000 yards...
Both Task Forces evade combat

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Manila , at 79,77

Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid detected at 76 NM, estimated altitude 11,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 23 minutes

Allied aircraft
B-29-1 Superfort x 20

Allied aircraft losses
B-29-1 Superfort: 1 damaged

Manpower hits 104
Fires 51460

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x B-29-1 Superfort bombing from 9000 feet
City Attack: 20 x 500 lb GP Bomb

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Air attack on Manila , at 79,77

Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid spotted at 29 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 9 minutes

Allied aircraft
B-29-1 Superfort x 5

Allied aircraft losses
B-29-1 Superfort: 2 damaged

Manpower hits 18
Fires 282720

Aircraft Attacking:
5 x B-29-1 Superfort bombing from 9000 feet
City Attack: 20 x 500 lb GP Bomb

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pre-Invasion action off Balikpapan (64,97)
Defensive Guns engage approaching landing force

145 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
BB Prince of Wales
BB Mississippi
BB California
LCI(G)-220
LCI(G)-82
LCI(G)-81
LCI(G)-80
LCI(G)-79
LCI(G)-78
LCI(G)-77
LCI(G)-76
LCI-69
LCI-68
LCI-67
LCI-66
APA Starlight
DE Encounter
DE James E. Craig

Japanese ground losses:
1146 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 84 disabled

Non Combat: 5 destroyed, 53 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled

Allied ground losses:
32 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

BB Prince of Wales firing at 83rd Infantry Brigade
BB Mississippi firing at 83rd Infantry Brigade

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amphibious Assault at Balikpapan (64,97)

TF 282 troops unloading over beach at Balikpapan, 64,97

Allied ground losses:
249 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 44 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 130 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 44 (0 destroyed, 44 disabled)
Vehicles lost 231 (0 destroyed, 231 disabled) not prepped?

8 Aviation Support troops lost from landing craft during unload of 160th USA Base Force /2
13 troops of a USA Rifle Squad 44 lost overboard during unload of 124th Cavalry Rgt /2

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on 68th Brigade, at 79,91 (Davao)

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid spotted at 39 NM, estimated altitude 11,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 11 minutes

Japanese aircraft
J2M3 Jack x 7
Ki-43-IV Oscar x 19

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 4
B-25C Mitchell x 15
B-25D1 Mitchell x 59
B-25G Mitchell x 30
B-25H Mitchell x 17
B-25J1 Mitchell x 3
FM-2 Wildcat x 21
F6F-5 Hellcat x 8
PB4Y-1 Liberator x 2
PBJ-1D Mitchell x 15
PV-1 Ventura x 11

Japanese aircraft losses
J2M3 Jack: 1 destroyed
Ki-43-IV Oscar: 5 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
FM-2 Wildcat: 5 destroyed

Japanese ground losses:
61 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Aircraft Attacking:
15 x PBJ-1D Mitchell bombing from 10000 feet
Ground Attack: 6 x 500 lb GP Bomb

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on 74th Infantry Regiment, at 64,97 (Balikpapan)

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid spotted at 40 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 13 minutes

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 9
B-17E Fortress x 7
B-24D Liberator x 6
B-24D1 Liberator x 14
B-24J Liberator x 60
F4U-1A Corsair x 25
F6F-5 Hellcat x 26
PB4Y-1 Liberator x 21

Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 3 damaged
B-24J Liberator: 3 damaged
PB4Y-1 Liberator: 1 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
557 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 32 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 37 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x PB4Y-1 Liberator bombing from 9000 feet
Ground Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

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

Ground combat at Balikpapan (64,97)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 3248 troops, 32 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 408

Defending force 19731 troops, 319 guns, 813 vehicles, Assault Value = 727

Japanese ground losses:
138 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 10 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 3 (1 destroyed, 2 disabled)

Assaulting units:
1st Infantry Regiment
83rd Infantry Brigade
7th Ind.Infantry Brigade
454th Ind.Infantry Battalion
74th Infantry Rgt /1
205th Naval Construction Battalion
24th Port Unit
90th JAAF AF Bn /2
14th Air Fleet
22nd JAAF AF Bn
206th Naval Const Bn /2

Defending units:
2nd USMC Amphb Tank Battalion
711th Tank Battalion
706th Tank Battalion
632nd Tank Destroyer Battalion
124th Cavalry Regiment
637th Tank Destroyer Battalion
96th Infantry Div /8
165th USA Base Force
148th Field Artillery Battalion
160th USA Base Force
2nd Medium Regiment

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

Ground combat at Saipan (108,93)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 2449 troops, 135 guns, 387 vehicles, Assault Value = 1340

Defending force 14178 troops, 108 guns, 153 vehicles, Assault Value = 41

Allied adjusted assault: 712

Japanese adjusted defense: 69

Allied assault odds: 10 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), disruption(-), fatigue(-), supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
979 casualties reported
Squads: 53 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 14 destroyed, 45 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 14 (12 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Vehicles lost 10 (1 destroyed, 9 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
Guns lost 9 (1 destroyed, 8 disabled)
Vehicles lost 9 (1 destroyed, 8 disabled)

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

42nd Recon Regiment Wiped Out at Saipan by attrition!!!

55th Field AA Battalion Wiped Out at Saipan by attrition!!!

22nd Ind. Engineer Regiment Wiped Out at Saipan by attrition!!!

19th RF Gun Battalion Wiped Out at Saipan by attrition!!!

45th Field AA Battalion Wiped Out at Saipan by attrition!!!

32nd Air Defense AA Battalion Wiped Out at Saipan by attrition!!!

17th Ind.Mixed Regiment Wiped Out at Saipan by attrition!!!

Saipan Naval Fortress Wiped Out at Saipan by attrition!!!

4th JNAF AF Unit Wiped Out at Saipan by attrition!!!

Japanese Unit(s) surrounded at Saipan

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Novemebr 4, 44
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Naval bombardment of Balikpapan at 64,97

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Japanese aircraft losses
P1Y1 Frances: 17 damaged
P1Y1 Frances: 2 destroyed on ground
Ki-67-Ia (T) Peggy: 1 damaged

Allied Ships
BB Richelieu
BB Massachusetts
BB Indiana
BB South Dakota
DD Blue II
DD Loke
DD Frej
DD Nicholson
DD Cassin Young
DD Irwin
DD Aulick

Japanese ground losses:
426 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 12 disabled
Non Combat: 16 destroyed, 20 disabled
Engineers: 8 destroyed, 14 disabled
Guns lost 3 (2 destroyed, 1 disabled)
Vehicles lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled)

Refinery hits 4
Oil hits 2
Airbase hits 15
Runway hits 28
Port hits 3
Port fuel hits 2
Port supply hits 2

BB Richelieu firing at Balikpapan
OS2U-3 Kingfisher acting as spotter for BB Massachusetts

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on 2nd Tank Division, at 55,57 , near Moulmein

Weather in hex: Moderate rain

Raid spotted at 32 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 9 minutes

Allied aircraft
Wellington B.X x 21
Wellington GR.XIII x 6
B-25C Mitchell x 8
B-25D1 Mitchell x 8
B-25H Mitchell x 21
PBJ-1D Mitchell x 22

No Allied losses

Aircraft Attacking:
12 x PBJ-1D Mitchell bombing from 10000 feet
Ground Attack: 6 x 500 lb GP Bomb

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on 74th Infantry Regiment, at 64,97 (Balikpapan)

Weather in hex: Light cloud

Raid spotted at 37 NM, estimated altitude 12,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 12 minutes

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 4
B-17E Fortress x 6
B-24D Liberator x 7
B-24D1 Liberator x 7
B-24J Liberator x 59
F4U-1A Corsair x 25
PB4Y-1 Liberator x 18

Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 1 damaged
B-24J Liberator: 2 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
487 casualties reported
Squads: 9 destroyed, 28 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 20 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

Aircraft Attacking:
9 x PB4Y-1 Liberator bombing from 9000 feet
Ground Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on 35th Ind.Mixed Brigade, at 55,60 , near Tavoy

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid detected at 78 NM, estimated altitude 12,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 26 minutes

Allied aircraft
Liberator B.III x 5
Liberator B.VI x 32
B-17F Fortress x 3
B-24D1 Liberator x 5
B-24J Liberator x 79
PB4Y-1 Liberator x 4

Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 1 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
90 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 8 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x PB4Y-1 Liberator bombing from 10000 feet
Ground Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

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

Ground combat at Saipan (108,93)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 2481 troops, 134 guns, 386 vehicles, Assault Value = 1369

Defending force 6459 troops, 30 guns, 143 vehicles, Assault Value = 27

Allied adjusted assault: 622

Japanese adjusted defense: 23

Allied assault odds: 27 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), disruption(-), fatigue(-), experience(-)
supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
2365 casualties reported
Squads: 8 destroyed, 4 disabled
Non Combat: 136 destroyed, 71 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 5 disabled
Guns lost 17 (13 destroyed, 4 disabled)
Vehicles lost 42 (30 destroyed, 12 disabled)

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

Reinforcements:

Chikuma-2 arrives at Tokyo

Losses:

Loss of CL Kinu on Nov 03, 1944 is admitted

Ships Sunk:

Previous report of sinking of CL Honolulu incorrect. Intelligence reports ship is still in service
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The Wake CD gun hit is at Rota and will be lost there I'm sure, unused. If Guam succumbs soon though, the one there, nearly as good, will be likely destroyed and I'll buy it back for one of the closer islands. Wish there were more of these!
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by obvert -- 9/9/2013 10:51:04 PM >

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 2181

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/11/2013 1:55:19 PM

obvert

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

5 - 6 November, 1944
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

SUBS: Lost the I-52 near Wake when it can't get through the escort screen and gets nailed by a DE after. Only a few token subs operating out here now. More as recon than anything, moving around a lot.

DEI: Balikpapan troops get absolutely pummeled from the air (level 6 forts mean nothing in clear hexes) and are the victims of a 5:1 assault on the 6th. Tomorrow will likely do the trick here.

At Jesselton I had two CA and two DD ready to pounce for a few days under what I thought was a protective CAP. Not so much. My bad, and I pay the price. Two CA and a DD sunk! I hate losing ships this way, and it's been a while since I've just given them over like this. A good move on Jocke's part to extend his air power into what has until recently been well protected CAPed IJ territory. His ability to sweep deeply now with many P-51 changes the game.

In addition he takes out a light CAP at Kendari and sends in the B-29s during the day to wipe out about 50 transports here. Another good move and surprising. he's getting better as we go and it's going to keep me on my toes from here on out.

S DEI: Looks like a move on Dili by walking troops from Lautem. It's good terrain and I have 350 AV here, but that will only take a week or two to conquer I'm sure. I'm moving out everything that I can from the whole area now back to Java. Full retreat.

BURMA: Near Bangkok 75 Corsair and 48 P-47s sweep the area before 300+ 4E and another 200+ 2E hit troops there and those marching toward the contested hex. It's slowing my tanks but strangely they are taking very few losses. The Allies should be days away from arriving there. My tanks are 3-4 days out for one division and 5-6 out for the other. As I've said, unless he has more than I think (more than 3k AV) we should be fine. The big Allied stack is now moving to Moulmein, but looks like he didn't send the tanks ahead, which is very good and means all of our forces will likely reach the jungle hexes unmolested.

CENTRAL PACFIC: Guam still holds while Saipan is finished off.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR November 5, 44
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Morning Air attack on 1st Infantry Regiment, at 64,97 (Balikpapan)

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid spotted at 39 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 13 minutes

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 3
B-17E Fortress x 3
B-24D Liberator x 6
B-24D1 Liberator x 19
B-24J Liberator x 77
PB4Y-1 Liberator x 24

Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 2 damaged
B-24J Liberator: 1 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
796 casualties reported
Squads: 11 destroyed, 42 disabled
Non Combat: 13 destroyed, 28 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
Guns lost 9 (7 destroyed, 2 disabled)

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x PB4Y-1 Liberator bombing from 9000 feet
Ground Attack: 10 x 500 lb GP Bomb

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

Ground combat at Saipan (108,93)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 2497 troops, 134 guns, 386 vehicles, Assault Value = 1391

Defending force 3511 troops, 19 guns, 77 vehicles, Assault Value = 16

Allied adjusted assault: 165

Japanese adjusted defense: 5

Allied assault odds: 33 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), disruption(-), fatigue(-), experience(-)
supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
913 casualties reported
Squads: 15 destroyed, 4 disabled
Non Combat: 137 destroyed, 51 disabled
Engineers: 4 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 20 (15 destroyed, 5 disabled)
Vehicles lost 62 (54 destroyed, 8 disabled)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR November 6, 44
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submarine attack near Wake Island at 134,97

Japanese Ships
SS I-52, hits 31, on fire, heavy damage

Allied Ships
xAK J.L. Luckenbach
xAK Knoxville City
xAK Lancaster
xAK Ohioan
PF Long Beach

SS I-52 is sighted by escort
I-52 diving deep ....
PF Long Beach attacking submerged sub ....
PF Long Beach fails to find sub, continues to search...
PF Long Beach attacking submerged sub ....
SS I-52 forced to surface!
PF Long Beach firing on surfaced sub ....
Sub slips beneath the waves

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Kendari , at 70,106

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid spotted at 33 NM, estimated altitude 35,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 12 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-61-Id Tony x 13

Allied aircraft
F4U-1D Corsair x 36

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-61-Id Tony: 5 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1D Corsair: 1 destroyed

Aircraft Attacking:
34 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 31000 feet

CAP engaged:
71st I.F.Chutai with Ki-61-Id Tony (0 airborne, 4 on standby, 8 scrambling)
1 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 20000 , scrambling fighters to 20000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 34 minutes

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Jesselton , at 68,86

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid detected at 29 NM, estimated altitude 34,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 8 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-61-Id Tony x 10
Ki-100-I Tony x 16

Allied aircraft
P-51B Mustang x 18

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-61-Id Tony: 3 destroyed
Ki-100-I Tony: 4 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
P-51B Mustang: 1 destroyed

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Jesselton at 68,86

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid detected at 54 NM, estimated altitude 12,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 23 minutes

Allied aircraft
F6F-3 Hellcat x 25
SB2C-3 Helldiver x 23

Allied aircraft losses
SB2C-3 Helldiver: 7 damaged

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai, Bomb hits 2, on fire
CA Atago, Bomb hits 1
DD Arashio, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires

Aircraft Attacking:
8 x SB2C-3 Helldiver releasing from 4000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
1 x SB2C-3 Helldiver releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb
14 x SB2C-3 Helldiver releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb

Heavy smoke from fires obscuring CA Chokai
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring DD Arashio

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Jesselton at 68,86

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid detected at 39 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 14 minutes

Allied aircraft
SBD-5 Dauntless x 16

Allied aircraft losses
SBD-5 Dauntless: 2 damaged

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
CA Atago, Bomb hits 2, on fire
DD Arare

Aircraft Attacking:
7 x SBD-5 Dauntless releasing from 4000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Jesselton at 68,86

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid detected at 57 NM, estimated altitude 11,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 24 minutes

Allied aircraft
SB2C-1C Helldiver x 21

Allied aircraft losses
SB2C-1C Helldiver: 2 damaged

Japanese Ships
CA Atago, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage
CA Chokai, heavy fires, heavy damage
DD Arashio, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
DD Arare

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x SB2C-1C Helldiver releasing from 4000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Kendari , at 70,106

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid spotted at 34 NM, estimated altitude 12,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 10 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-61-Id Tony x 1

Allied aircraft
B-29-1 Superfort x 70

Japanese aircraft losses
H8K2-L Emily: 13 destroyed on ground
L2D2 Tabby: 20 destroyed on ground
H8K2 Emily: 5 destroyed on ground
Ki-49-II KAI Helen: 16 destroyed on ground
Ki-45 KAIa Nick: 3 destroyed on ground

No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
32 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 6 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Airbase hits 83
Airbase supply hits 28
Runway hits 118

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x B-29-1 Superfort bombing from 9000 feet
Airfield Attack: 20 x 500 lb GP Bomb

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on Atimonan , at 80,79

Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid spotted at 11 NM, estimated altitude 34,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 3 minutes

Japanese aircraft
J2M3 Jack x 14
N1K2-J George x 16
Ki-43-IV Oscar x 46

Allied aircraft
F4U-1D Corsair x 24

Japanese aircraft losses
J2M3 Jack: 1 destroyed
N1K2-J George: 1 destroyed
Ki-43-IV Oscar: 5 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1D Corsair: 1 destroyed

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x F4U-1D Corsair sweeping at 31000 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Jesselton at 68,86

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid detected at 66 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 28 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-61-Id Tony x 8
Ki-100-I Tony x 1

Allied aircraft
F6F-3 Hellcat x 24
SB2C-3 Helldiver x 22

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-61-Id Tony: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
SB2C-3 Helldiver: 8 damaged

Japanese Ships
DD Arare
CA Chokai, Bomb hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage
CA Atago, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage

Aircraft Attacking:
7 x SB2C-3 Helldiver releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb

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

Ground combat at Guam (106,95)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 42027 troops, 911 guns, 1458 vehicles, Assault Value = 1479

Defending force 24731 troops, 425 guns, 177 vehicles, Assault Value = 314

Allied engineers reduce fortifications to 0

Allied adjusted assault: 524

Japanese adjusted defense: 889

Allied assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 0)

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

Japanese ground losses:
1011 casualties reported
Squads: 25 destroyed, 86 disabled
Non Combat: 72 destroyed, 97 disabled
Engineers: 4 destroyed, 41 disabled
Guns lost 73 (11 destroyed, 62 disabled)
Vehicles lost 146 (119 destroyed, 27 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
467 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 54 disabled
Non Combat: 3 destroyed, 36 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 17 disabled
Guns lost 36 (2 destroyed, 34 disabled)
Vehicles lost 76 (8 destroyed, 68 disabled)

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

Ground combat at Balikpapan (64,97)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 20192 troops, 326 guns, 820 vehicles, Assault Value = 808

Defending force 13156 troops, 93 guns, 38 vehicles, Assault Value = 284

Allied adjusted assault: 512

Japanese adjusted defense: 90

Allied assault odds: 5 to 1 (fort level 6)

Allied Assault reduces fortifications to 5

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

Japanese ground losses:
1812 casualties reported
Squads: 72 destroyed, 55 disabled
Non Combat: 40 destroyed, 48 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 38 disabled
Guns lost 34 (15 destroyed, 19 disabled)
Units destroyed 1

Allied ground losses:
426 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 38 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 13 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Vehicles lost 15 (1 destroyed, 14 disabled)

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

Ground combat at Satawal (105,105)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 2997 troops, 42 guns, 46 vehicles, Assault Value = 130

Defending force 1872 troops, 12 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 50

Allied adjusted assault: 32

Japanese adjusted defense: 45

Allied assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 4)

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

Japanese ground losses:
208 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 19 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 1 disabled

Allied ground losses:
722 casualties reported
Squads: 6 destroyed, 123 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 6 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Assaulting units:
1st Filipino Inf Regiment

Defending units:
91st Naval Guard Unit
53rd Construction Battalion

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

Ground combat at Akutan Island (171,49)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 881 troops, 14 guns, 16 vehicles, Assault Value = 41

Defending force 718 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 25

Allied adjusted assault: 8

Japanese adjusted defense: 79

Allied assault odds: 1 to 9 (fort level 2)

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

Assaulting units:
Rocky Mountain Rger Battalion

Defending units:
53rd Nav Gd /2

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

Reinforcements:

ML G-427 arrives at Nagoya
4th South Seas Gsn arrives at Tokyo
LST T-152 arrives at Shimonoseki

Losses:

Loss of SS I-52 on Nov 06, 1944 is admitted

Ships Sunk:

Previous report of sinking of CVE Santee incorrect. Intelligence reports ship is still in service
Previous report of sinking of CVE Copahee incorrect. Intelligence reports ship is still in service
Previous report of sinking of CVE Wake Island incorrect. Intelligence reports ship is still in service
Previous report of sinking of SS Redfish incorrect. Intelligence reports ship is still in service
TK Matinicock is reported to have been sunk near Hollandia on Oct 08, 1944
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Buying back troops has become a daily ritual now. It's a double price. One for the units, one for the change of HQ once they have arrived. I could leave some General Defense and fly them to bases that have that HQ, but most places I need to defend don't and so I'd have to spend PPs to change those anyway. Better to just free up the units. But I can see that this is where I'll be spending most of my PPs for here on out.

Many of the units I've flown out have most of their TOE, but another reason to buy out certain units is if I don't these bad boys are left. I need lots for th next few months.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by obvert -- 9/11/2013 1:58:01 PM >

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 2182

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/11/2013 2:05:58 PM

fcharton

Posts: 1112
Joined: 10/4/2010
From: France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert
Balikpapan troops get absolutely pummeled from the air (level 6 forts mean nothing in clear hexes) and are the victims of a 5:1 assault on the 6th.

Clear terrain seems to trump everything you can do in term of defense. Do you think it would be better not to buil those hexes at all? It looks a lot like a total waste of resources.

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert
Buying back troops has become a daily ritual now. It's a double price. One for the units, one for the change of HQ once they have arrived. I could leave some General Defense and fly them to bases that have that HQ, but most places I need to defend don't and so I'd have to spend PPs to change those anyway. Better to just free up the units. But I can see that this is where I'll be spending most of my PPs for here on out.

Is there any possibility to change some bases near Japan to General Defense? This works for squadrons, and might work with small units you air transport. I have not done that yet (still trying to decide whether it is gamey or not...), but it might help.

Francois

(in reply to obvert)

Post #: 2183

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/11/2013 2:32:04 PM

PaxMondo

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: fcharton

Is there any possibility to change some bases near Japan to General Defense? This works for squadrons, and might work with small units you air transport. I have not done that yet (still trying to decide whether it is gamey or not...), but it might help.

Francois

Definitely NOT gamey. Do it all the time for exactly as you say. Choosing the right islands can save a lot of PP's depending upon how you plan to setup their defenses. Obviously, this tactic will NOT work for any place you want to put a CD unit on ....

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to fcharton)

Post #: 2184

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/11/2013 3:01:05 PM

fcharton

Posts: 1112
Joined: 10/4/2010
From: France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo
Definitely NOT gamey. Do it all the time for exactly as you say. Choosing the right islands can save a lot of PP's depending upon how you plan to setup their defenses. Obviously, this tactic will NOT work for any place you want to put a CD unit on ....

Interesting. I discovered this a bit late, but it seems that some bases (as far as the marianas) can therefore benefit of some of the restricted squadrons from Japan, which makes quite a difference at a time when you have a few good planes stuck on the Home Island. It is even truer for some of the Air HQ (and air support units)

Francois

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 2185

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/11/2013 3:12:52 PM

obvert

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

Yes, I've done it in the Kuriles. it's tough as places like Formosa should really be able to use some of those troops, as should Okinawa, the Kuriles and the Bonins, but they can't unless you buy them. I have changed just a few HQs to see how it works in the Bonins, the smallest island whatever it's called. It's also VERY expensive if the place is built up. Taihoku is like 1000 PPs or something!!!

So it's cost prohibitive most places but for some small islands I'll definitely do it. I have to add some garrison to all of the little 'jimas' around Japan, and these will be from small infantry units in Japan that I otherwise can't form into divisions. Base forces are the problem of course as they need their radar and that can't be flown.

I'll still build up some clear hexes in the last lines of defense. It can help if the other factors are there, like ground reserves and interlocking air bases, defenses to help protect against bombardments, but yeah, in my next game it will be selective. Territory is everything in defense.

_____________________________

"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to fcharton)

Post #: 2186

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/11/2013 9:22:38 PM

SqzMyLemon

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

quote:

ORIGINAL: fcharton

Is there any possibility to change some bases near Japan to General Defense? This works for squadrons, and might work with small units you air transport. I have not done that yet (still trying to decide whether it is gamey or not...), but it might help.

Francois

Definitely NOT gamey. Do it all the time for exactly as you say. Choosing the right islands can save a lot of PP's depending upon how you plan to setup their defenses. Obviously, this tactic will NOT work for any place you want to put a CD unit on ....

I've always struggled with this. I've never been able to change a bases HQ to "General Defence" as it's always greyed out and not an option. Am I picking the wrong bases? I've never been able to get this to work.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

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

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 2187

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/11/2013 9:25:33 PM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

IIRC, to change a base's HQ, there has to be at least one unit with that HQ at the base.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/view/staffmonkeys/home

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 2188

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/11/2013 9:44:46 PM

fcharton

Posts: 1112
Joined: 10/4/2010
From: France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs
IIRC, to change a base's HQ, there has to be at least one unit with that HQ at the base.

That's interesting... I just did it with Saipan. Converted a SNLF unit there to General Defense, and lo and behold, I could now make Saipan a General Defense base.

This said, there are bases you can convert without having any troops there. I could convert Haha Jima (but not Chichi), Agrihan and Anatahan (but not the other northern marianas), Sakhalin (but not the Kuriles) to General Defense without (obviously) any general defense trop there.

So, basically, there are two ways.

1- the cheap way: click every base, and look at the list. There might be a reason to this madness, but it is difficult to spot
2- move a cheap unit in, convert it to General Defense (or China Exped, or Kwantung), and there you go (note, this might be construed as an exploit, as it means you can easily make Rangoon and Kwantung army base, or Truk a General Defense base)

Francois

< Message edited by fcharton -- 9/11/2013 9:46:28 PM >

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2189

RE: Wild Sheep Chase - 9/11/2013 9:46:07 PM

HansBolter

Posts: 7704
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: United States
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

IIRC, to change a base's HQ, there has to be at least one unit with that HQ at the base.

This has never been the case for the Allies.

I routinely change Noumea to South Pacific long before any SP units have arrived.

The cost of changing a base HQ is based on the combined size of airfields and ports and it is way, way cheaper to change any Allied ones you plan to want under different HQs before you have built them up. This leads the Allied player to make those changes long before units under the HQs of various Theaters arrive.

_____________________________

Hans

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2190