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: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (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: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) Page: <<   < prev  145 146 [147] 148 149   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/31/2019 6:10:33 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Ok, so based upon the reading suggested above, killing all those HQs really did nothing other than dispose of support squads, right? The critical HQ to kill is the last one of the type (corps or command). Apparently, the HQ a unit is assigned to makes no difference concerning the combat bonus. Or anything else I can see, for that matter...

Is it safe to assume an air or naval HQ has no impact on the land combat bonus?


Assuming that all HQs are providing a bonus, then sure, it did "nothing."

And yes, HQa/HQn do not provide land combat bonuses. I know there are some "naval" HQs that do (e.g., 5th Fleet which is an HQ), but the actual unit type of HQn does not, to my knowledge.

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4381
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/31/2019 6:13:12 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli
... I'm particularly pleased with the destruction of so many Group Armies. They can potentially increase the AV of their infantry units by 90%...

Not so.

A Corps HQ can provide a combat bonus of up to 10%. A Command HQ can provide a combat bonus of up to 90%. The combat bonus is fed into the firepower phase of the combat algorithm, it has nothing to do with the adjusted AV which is determined after combat and which counts who is "left standing" for further combat.

Read this thread for how the land combat bonus operates.
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3545042&mpage=1&key=bonus�
Alfred

And then also take a peek on how HQc AV bonus measures up in the actual game http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4211316&mpage=1&key=# post #25



If you read GA thread, you will see why I never go the extra distance to Neikiang to recover.


Literally from that thread:

quote:

Main finding #2 (a bit surprising) is that IDs seem to repair slightly faster in a developed base hex compared to non-base, but not that much faster. In 60 turns standard TOE IDs repaired about 23-30% in base and 16-25% in non-base hexes.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 4382
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/31/2019 6:23:08 PM   
GetAssista

 

Posts: 2732
Joined: 9/19/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli
Ok, so based upon the reading suggested above, killing all those HQs really did nothing other than dispose of support squads, right? The critical HQ to kill is the last one of the type (corps or command). Apparently, the HQ a unit is assigned to makes no difference concerning the combat bonus. Or anything else I can see, for that matter...

Assuming that all HQs are providing a bonus, then sure, it did "nothing."

Land ratings of the commanders play a role. You can hope that you removed some of the skilled ones
Preparation target of the HQ also matters for the AV. Although I assume your opponent most probably set every HQ to Chungking as a target, there may be a few reasons for him to not do that, like experience training. So you can hope that you removed all of the 100% CK trained HQs

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 4383
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/31/2019 6:40:46 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli
... I'm particularly pleased with the destruction of so many Group Armies. They can potentially increase the AV of their infantry units by 90%...

Not so.

A Corps HQ can provide a combat bonus of up to 10%. A Command HQ can provide a combat bonus of up to 90%. The combat bonus is fed into the firepower phase of the combat algorithm, it has nothing to do with the adjusted AV which is determined after combat and which counts who is "left standing" for further combat.

Read this thread for how the land combat bonus operates.
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3545042&mpage=1&key=bonus�
Alfred

And then also take a peek on how HQc AV bonus measures up in the actual game http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4211316&mpage=1&key=# post #25



If you read GA thread, you will see why I never go the extra distance to Neikiang to recover.


Literally from that thread:

quote:

Main finding #2 (a bit surprising) is that IDs seem to repair slightly faster in a developed base hex compared to non-base, but not that much faster. In 60 turns standard TOE IDs repaired about 23-30% in base and 16-25% in non-base hexes.




Correct, the delta is so small not to merit the extra six days of travel time.

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 4384
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/31/2019 7:08:28 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		Ok, the turn is off. Next turn I'll see what ground units I destroyed. I'm not sure it really matters though. I'm really curious to see what the Chinese raw AV has been degraded to...

I really appreciate all the discussion going on. I've learned a lot (and am trying to unlearn things like fatigue, etc.). This is all new ground for me, as will be the rest of the war.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 4385
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/31/2019 7:09:40 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		Lowpe, I've stopped moving my troops to rest. They're now resting in Chungking. Lots of B&Bs there.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4386
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/31/2019 7:11:06 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Lowpe, I've stopped moving my troops to rest. They're now resting in Chungking. Lots of B&Bs there.



Some vacancies are opening up I guess.

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4387
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/31/2019 7:21:39 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli
... I'm particularly pleased with the destruction of so many Group Armies. They can potentially increase the AV of their infantry units by 90%...

Not so.

A Corps HQ can provide a combat bonus of up to 10%. A Command HQ can provide a combat bonus of up to 90%. The combat bonus is fed into the firepower phase of the combat algorithm, it has nothing to do with the adjusted AV which is determined after combat and which counts who is "left standing" for further combat.

Read this thread for how the land combat bonus operates.
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3545042&mpage=1&key=bonus�
Alfred

And then also take a peek on how HQc AV bonus measures up in the actual game http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4211316&mpage=1&key=# post #25



If you read GA thread, you will see why I never go the extra distance to Neikiang to recover.


Literally from that thread:

quote:

Main finding #2 (a bit surprising) is that IDs seem to repair slightly faster in a developed base hex compared to non-base, but not that much faster. In 60 turns standard TOE IDs repaired about 23-30% in base and 16-25% in non-base hexes.




Correct, the delta is so small not to merit the extra six days of travel time.



Except that it's over 60 days. That is not really relevant to an ongoing assault. We know/suspect that a lot of recovery is done in the short term. A test done over a period of 14-21 days would be relevant.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 4388
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/31/2019 7:22:32 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Lowpe, I've stopped moving my troops to rest. They're now resting in Chungking. Lots of B&Bs there.


This works fine when the units are not in very rough shape. For units that are majority disabled, I'd move them.

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4389
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/31/2019 7:28:37 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		I came very close to 2:1 odds on that last attack. I'll rest all those with >100 disabled infantry squads (probably 3 by the next attack) but may throw everyone in for the attack after that, if needed. I figure 2 more attacks max to take Chungking.

Next question for the group. In the ground combat screen, when you see a HQ you see:

HQ: 1

-or-

HQ: 0

Anyone know what that means? My guess is that the 0 means there are only disabled squads in that HQ. If that is the case, does that HQ still available to give a bonus?

< Message edited by Mike Solli -- 1/31/2019 7:29:24 PM >

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 4390
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/31/2019 7:31:10 PM   
Mike Solli


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

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Lowpe, I've stopped moving my troops to rest. They're now resting in Chungking. Lots of B&Bs there.


This works fine when the units are not in very rough shape. For units that are majority disabled, I'd move them.


That makes sense. Beat up units shouldn't be attacking so they may as well move to a secure area for R&R.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 4391
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 1/31/2019 7:43:41 PM   
jdsrae


Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

17 Dec 43

Sub War

Brutal today.



The improved Escort ships start arriving soon but not in large numbers unless you’ve accelerated some?
I’ve been pondering how best to use them, more ASW groups to add to the SC force, or join/replace the PB on convoy duty.
If today’s results become a trend probably most to convoy duty to try and protect your TK and bigger AK?

< Message edited by jdsrae -- 1/31/2019 7:50:57 PM >

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4392
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 2/1/2019 1:06:11 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 9750
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline 		Well, the allies have already gotten their first BIG ASW upgrade. All under the hood, but it happens before the end of '43. Don't know if the date is hardcoded or not, but sometime H2Y43, there is the first big upgrade. And it stings.



_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to jdsrae)
Post #: 4393
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 2/1/2019 2:35:02 AM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		If it's a DD, then it'll be accelerated. What classes are you talking about? I have some Matsus coming soon along with some others. I've gotten a string of Etorofus, which I use as escorts from Singapore. They have that nice 8k endurance. I'll check it out in the morning.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 4394
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 2/1/2019 5:28:27 AM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

I came very close to 2:1 odds on that last attack. I'll rest all those with >100 disabled infantry squads (probably 3 by the next attack) but may throw everyone in for the attack after that, if needed. I figure 2 more attacks max to take Chungking.

Next question for the group. In the ground combat screen, when you see a HQ you see:

HQ: 1

-or-

HQ: 0

Anyone know what that means? My guess is that the 0 means there are only disabled squads in that HQ. If that is the case, does that HQ still available to give a bonus?


1. The combat bonus is derived from the nature of the HQ, not what is inside it.

2. The land combat screen shows the raw unadjusted AV of a unit. This raw metric is reduced as AV qualified devices are destroyed or disabled.

3. HQs can have so many non AV qualified devices that a nominal AV of "1" is displayed for these extremely large units. If the displayed value is reduced to "0" it simply points out the unit is below the display threshold. It can be below the display threshold even if all it's non AV qualified devices are in a ready state.

4. Between the end of combat and the next turn's input orders phase there is a logistics phase wherein disabled devices can be recovered to ready status.

Alfred

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4395
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 2/1/2019 9:19:08 AM   
jdsrae


Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli
What classes are you talking about?


These bad boys. You should have a couple of Mikura class E by now, with 8 x Type 2 DC + 1 x 3in AS Mortar + Type 22 surface search radar I think that's as good an ASW package as you can get.
Your Shimushu and Etorofu can upgrade to a similar package by now too. I use the E W-## ships in SNLF with their DMS cousins so they aren't included in this image.

I only looked at the details of IJN ASW weapons a few days ago. My initial excitement at seeing the 3in AS Mortar could reach a depth of 1000' was tempered when I saw the effect of 35, compared to 357 effect for a Type 2 DC.
Not sure what a 35 effect means (is that like a tickle compared to a punch?) but at 1000' down that tickle might still do bad things to a submarine hull. Even if it only does a little bit of damage, that's better than nothing and might make it easier to find/hit again the next day.

As the Matsu and Tachibana classes were simplified DDs with less capability than earlier DDs, I'm thinking they are better used in ASW or convoy roles rather than operating with Combined Fleet. They arrive with the Type 2 DC (476' deep & 357 effect) but no AS Mortar.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by jdsrae -- 2/1/2019 9:43:42 AM >

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4396
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 2/1/2019 10:28:34 AM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		Thanks Guys! That makes sense, Alfred. The reason why I asked was because of artillery. It usually flips from 1 to 0 when it fires.

That chart is great! I have all the DD types accelerating as soon as I can. I'll have to check the E types to see if they use naval or merchant points. Lots of excess merchant points (most are turned off) but the naval points are still at a premium.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to jdsrae)
Post #: 4397
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 2/1/2019 11:16:59 AM   
jdsrae


Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline 		bad news, naval points... but they're only about 4 points/ship.
I'll have to check how it works again but does that mean even if you accelerate them they don't arrive much earlier?

< Message edited by jdsrae -- 2/1/2019 11:17:39 AM >

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4398
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 2/1/2019 11:58:24 AM   
Mike Solli


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

ORIGINAL: jdsrae

bad news, naval points... but they're only about 4 points/ship.
I'll have to check how it works again but does that mean even if you accelerate them they don't arrive much earlier?


Figures. When you accelerate them, they use 3x the points but advance 2 days per day. So advance something 10 days out, it arrives in 5 days, but at triple the cost.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to jdsrae)
Post #: 4399
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 2/1/2019 12:25:36 PM   
jdsrae


Posts: 2716
Joined: 3/1/2010
From: Gandangara Country
Status: offline 		I concur. Also ref manual 13.4.1: acceleration only kicks in during the period >10x and <30 x durabilty, so there’s limited benefit accelerating small ships.
I’ve had a couple of beers this evening so my maths might be out, but for a 4 durability E you can accelerate inside the zone 40 to 120 days out.
Paying triple price for the 80 days “in the zone” could get you the ship 40 days quicker. So to my brain, in its current state, it doesn’t look like you can get a ship more than 10xdurability ahead of schedule even if accelerated.

_____________________________

Currently playing my first PBEM, no house rules Scenario 1 as IJ.
AAR link (no SolInvictus): https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4684655

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4400
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 2/1/2019 12:47:05 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		Yep, that's what it says but you can accelerate a ship at <10x durability days left. Maybe a change in a patch? I just checked and you can definitely accelerate down to 0 days. So, in the case you're discussing, if you start accelerating at 120 days, you get the ship 60 days early.

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to jdsrae)
Post #: 4401
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 2/1/2019 12:59:17 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		Also note that it really isn't triple the cost. It's less.

Take your example:

Durability of 4, accelerate at 120 days.

Normal cost is 120*4 = 480 naval production points
Accelerated cost is 60*4*3 = 720 naval production points

So the cost in points is really 50% more than you would normally have spent. You're just concentrating it in half the time. That is also pretty cool. That last 60 days you can accelerate the next one that hits the 120 day window.


< Message edited by Mike Solli -- 2/1/2019 1:00:33 PM >

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4402
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 2/1/2019 4:06:53 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		I have never seen a hit from a IJN ASW mortar. They do fire.

However, it might do things under the hood, like raise dl. Some players believe dl is a constant from the opening salvo, but I think some kind of dl changes during combat routine.

For example, put a ship on fire during a night engagement and it quickly becomes a focal point.

The "target obscured by smoke" message may be chrome, but then again it might not be.

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4403
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 2/1/2019 4:14:06 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Also note that it really isn't triple the cost. It's less.

Take your example:

Durability of 4, accelerate at 120 days.

Normal cost is 120*4 = 480 naval production points
Accelerated cost is 60*4*3 = 720 naval production points

So the cost in points is really 50% more than you would normally have spent. You're just concentrating it in half the time. That is also pretty cool. That last 60 days you can accelerate the next one that hits the 120 day window.



I try to accelerate all of the cost 3 and cost 4 ASW ships, if I can.

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4404
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 2/1/2019 5:51:11 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		Ok, back to the war...

18 Dec 43

Sub War

The I-178, patrolling a few hexes SE of Umnak, found an enemy TF. She attempted to engage but missed. In the ensuing action, she took an DC hit. More on this to follow.

The DD Akikaze caught up with Steelhead off Cam Ranh Bay, and hit her once. She's the sub that sank a TK there yesterday.

5 Fleet

It turned out that I-178 was a tripwire for an Allied BB bombardment TF composed of 4 old pre-war BBs, a CA, 2 CLs and at least 5 DDs. The action against that little sub must have slowed the TF down enough that it didn't reach Umnak until daylight. They bombarded my forces there killing a couple infantry steps and disabling about a dozen more, but increasing disruption on 2/3 of the division. They're still sitting in the hex. Here's where it gets interesting. (See below) MKB (Hiyo, Ryujo, Nisshin, Shoho and Hosho - 117 Zeros, 18 Judies, 45 Jills) will be in position to retaliate if that TF sticks around to bombard again. All the Jills are set to carry torpedoes. My hope is that they will damage a few ships enough to slow them down. I'd like to hit the US TF with planes only, but I do have a backup, in the form of Yamato, Musashi, Nagato and Mutsu. You can see that they are a day out of being in position to either engage some damaged ships or bombard Umnak. Should be interesting. He has no idea either TF is there.

Also up here, the US DD Schley (Wilkes class) is hanging out near Etorofu (pic in next post - I don't know how to post more than 1 pic ). The Betty daitai I sent to the area launched two strikes of 13 aircraft each, but missed. I've moved a few more aircraft there. There now is:

54 Nells
27 Jills
18 Judies
27 Sallies (ASW training so they will have a hard time even hitting the water)
9 Jeans (!)

Should that DD enter Etorofu, she'll be greeted by a bunch of CD guns and mines.

We'll see what happens here...

4 Fleet

I'm including the Marianas in 4 Fleet, since the effective front line is being pushed west toward Japan. Anyway, a single ship (I think), probably a DD (I think) is tooling around Pagan Island. (See 2 posts down.) All I have here (plane wise) is a partial daitai of Betties at Saipan (The remainder of the daitai is either broken down at Truk or burnt to a crisp at Truk. ). KB is around Truk (see below) but I have a few CAs and CLs that formed a surface TF at Saipan and is going hunting. Oh yeah, I have Akagi and Soryu (just finished repairs/refit at Kobe) and Kaiyo (brand spanking new) heading toward Saipan. He has no idea they are there. . Together, they have 90 Zeros, 42 Judies and 36 Jills. Let's see how they do.

SE Fleet

Well, that "BB" TF was really a CA TF, composed of CAs Portland, Louisville and Vincennes, escorted by 13 DDs. They sailed into Truk where DD Ringgold (Fletcher class) hit a mine. They proceeded to bombard Truk doing no damage:

Night Naval bombardment of Truk at 112,108 - Coastal Guns Fire Back!

351 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Allied Ships
CA Vincennes, Shell hits 10, on fire
CA Louisville
CA Portland, Shell hits 12, on fire

On their way out, they ran into two little escorts (E Manazuru and Hatsukari) on ASW duty around Truk (I forgot about them). Oops. They fought a gallant battle:

Day Time Surface Combat, near Truk at 112,109, Range 23,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
E Manazuru, Shell hits 7, and is sunk
E Hatsukari, Shell hits 4, on fire

Allied Ships
CA Portland
CA Louisville
CA Vincennes, Shell hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
DD McKee
DD Ringgold
DD Saufley
DD Duncan
DD Bancroft
DD McCook
DD Benham
DD Stack
DD Shaw
DD Tucker
DD Dale
DD Monaghan
DD Aylwin

It looks like Hatsukari will make it to Saipan. Their sacrifice will allow KB to take out the damaged ships, which are just outside of Truk. The undamaged ships have already written them off.

SRA

Nothing to report.

Burma

I swept Kalemyo today, killing 7 of 11 enemy fighters (Hurricane IIc, Spitfire VIII and Kittyhawk III) for the cost of 2 Franks.

China

My bombers did nice execution today, killing 25 squads (16 infantry) and disabling another 156 squads. The artillery bombardment added 36 kills (33 infantry) and 29 more disabled.

I learned that yesterday's assault killed the following:

1 infantry (79 remaining)
2 base forces (17 remaining)
2 artillery (1 remaining)
0 AT (0 remaining)
0 AA (2 remaining - but they haven't fired in months)
4 construction regiments (0 remaining)
21 HQ (23 remaining)

A total of 1501 infantry squads have been destroyed this month.

Other Stuff

Reinforcement: MTB G-164

The D4Y4 Judy R&D advanced to 10/44 (will become operational 4/44).

I'm changing my submarine tactics. Instead of using them to sink Allied cargo ships (he has to have a million so it doesn't matter) they are being repositioned for an early warning line so I can spot enemy TFs coming a little quicker. That will give me time to react. Most of the reactions happening today are just dumb luck.

< Message edited by Mike Solli -- 2/1/2019 6:04:41 PM >

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 4405
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 2/1/2019 5:53:13 PM   
Mike Solli


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






Attachment (1)

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4406
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 2/1/2019 5:59:19 PM   
Mike Solli


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






Attachment (1)

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4407
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 2/1/2019 5:59:59 PM   
Mike Solli


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






Attachment (1)

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4408
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 2/1/2019 6:00:33 PM   
Mike Solli


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






Attachment (1)

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4409
RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) - 2/1/2019 6:50:20 PM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 15792
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline 		Update on the Japanese army in Chungking (now 25 divisions and 1 tank division):

Fatigue: 71.5, down 12.0
Disruption: 27.8, down 23.0
Disabled: 10.7, down 1.3

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 4410
Page:   <<   < prev  145 146 [147] 148 149   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Once Again into the Breach - Mike (J) vs. tc464 (A) Page: <<   < prev  145 146 [147] 148 149   next >   >>
Jump to:





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


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.859