RE: 1944 July 17

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: 1944 July 17

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: 1944 July 17

Page: << < prev 84 85 [86] 87 88 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: 1944 July 17 - 7/6/2015 9:26:21 PM

witpqs

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

The supply stockpile switch only affects base to base transfers of supply. So, Bangkok and other bases being right there (two major road hexes away, = 7 days per week supply pull), they must be low enough that they are not able to supply all units within range. Why?
1) The whole area is low, right down to Singapore.
2) Singapore is stockpiling, to prevent the greater waste of losing most supply to Allied armies as bases are cut off and/or captured.

My guess is 2, but I do believe that supply overall is somewhat of an issue for the empire. And there you see my real motive: altruism. I seek to destroy large Imperial formations so that the rest will have enough supply!

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2551

RE: 1944 July 17 - 7/6/2015 11:04:22 PM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

quote:

The supply stockpile switch only affects base to base transfers of supply

Ok ... and there is the minimum amount of supply to be retained.

My thoughts on specific units getting supply are from my experience with a Northern Oz axis of advance ..

First I had to stockpile and set a huge number of supplies as a threshold ... build up all the bases between Alice Springs and Darwin to max and then take the stockpiling/limit off ... then my 2nd AUS all were supplied.
Good to know that only base to base like to (Tenant Creek) is affected by the stockpile switch

Although I still think the minimum supply level switch causes hording too ...

_____________________________

"What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so"

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2552

RE: 1944 July 17 - 7/6/2015 11:07:30 PM

witpqs

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

Bases used to hold supply at their minimum, but that was changed. It was absurd to have so many nearby units starving out of existence when the bases were flush. So now a base will go right down to zero as it supplies units.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Crackaces)

Post #: 2553

RE: 1944 July 17 - 7/7/2015 8:23:06 AM

Drakanel

Posts: 253
Joined: 4/6/2015
Status: offline

Logically speaking, it seems likely to me that Andav concentrated his supply at Singapore. I don't see how he could have so little supply around in the entire zone unless he did that.

I mean, he WAS caught unprepared by the Cam Ranh Bay invasion, and so by the rest of the operation in Thailand. So he could not have moved out that much supply by ship... And I don't think he was low on supply at Singapore to start with.

Besides it makes sense, Singapore is worth a lot for a variety of reasons (not just points). I can't see him just leaving it without trying to fight/ delay...

< Message edited by Drakanel -- 7/7/2015 9:24:36 AM >

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2554

RE: 1944 July 17 - 7/7/2015 2:42:16 PM

Crackaces

Posts: 3858
Joined: 7/9/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Bases used to hold supply at their minimum, but that was changed. It was absurd to have so many nearby units starving out of existence when the bases were flush. So now a base will go right down to zero as it supplies units.

OK Good piece of information ...makes the stockpile button more important for retaining supplies if desired ..

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2555

1944 July 21 - 7/9/2015 6:24:27 PM

witpqs

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

Note that I still have the turn but only intend to do more house keeping chores such as pilot training. Andav is going away for a few days so this is a good time to catch up on the vast conspiracy of details.

1944 July 21

The Empire captured:

The Allies captured:
Kompong Chhnang
Mergui
Pisanuloke

There were Imperial amphibious or airborne operations at:

There were Allied amphibious or airborne operations at:

Naval Bombardments

quote:

Allied Ships Bombarding Pagan

Our subs got an xAK.

Quiet in China.

Imperial defenses broken at Pisanuloke and Mergui.

quote:

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

Ground combat at Pisanuloke (58,57)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 13951 troops, 229 guns, 435 vehicles, Assault Value = 354

Defending force 8120 troops, 93 guns, 72 vehicles, Assault Value = 69

Allied adjusted assault: 268

Japanese adjusted defense: 7

Allied assault odds: 38 to 1 (fort level 2)

Allied forces CAPTURE Pisanuloke !!!

Combat modifiers
Defender: disruption(-), preparation(-), fatigue(-), morale(-)
experience(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
1429 casualties reported
Squads: 195 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 227 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 8 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 30 (30 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Vehicles lost 67 (67 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Units retreated 6

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

Defeated Japanese Units Retreating!

Assaulting units:
150th RAC Regiment
3rd Carabiniers Regiment
Gardner's Horse Regiment
2nd British Division

Defending units:
4th RTA Division
I./143rd Infantry Battalion
3rd RTA Division
21st Ind.Mixed Brigade
2nd RTA/C Division
Burma Area Army

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

Ground combat at Mergui (53,62)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 14686 troops, 261 guns, 346 vehicles, Assault Value = 432

Defending force 6376 troops, 80 guns, 11 vehicles, Assault Value = 73

Allied adjusted assault: 330

Japanese adjusted defense: 43

Allied assault odds: 7 to 1 (fort level 1)

Allied forces CAPTURE Mergui !!!

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

Japanese ground losses:
1094 casualties reported
Squads: 59 destroyed, 7 disabled
Non Combat: 69 destroyed, 11 disabled
Engineers: 19 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 27 (25 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Vehicles lost 11 (11 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Units retreated 8

Allied ground losses:
154 casualties reported
Squads: 5 destroyed, 3 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Vehicles lost 7 (1 destroyed, 6 disabled)

Defeated Japanese Units Retreating!

Assaulting units:
11th PAVO Regiment
3rd Cavalry Regiment
4th Burma Battalion
26th Indian Division

Defending units:
9th Infantry Regiment
2nd INA Gandhi Regiment
8th JAAF AF Coy
311th Ship Eng Coy
91st JAAF AF Bn
8th Field Construction Battalion
112th Infantry Regiment
9th JAAF AF Coy

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

All our forces at Pisanuloke are moving out to pursue south and destroy the Imperial units while they are in the open.

The vice is closing from both directions as Kompong Chhnang falls to a single TD Bn. Two armoured units reduced the defenses at Tourane, and that hapless support unit was sent running through the jungle.

quote:

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

Ground combat at Kompong Chhnang (59,68)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 552 troops, 3 guns, 82 vehicles, Assault Value = 48

Defending force 2059 troops, 11 guns, 3 vehicles, Assault Value = 5

Allied adjusted assault: 22

Japanese adjusted defense: 4

Allied assault odds: 5 to 1 (fort level 0)

Allied forces CAPTURE Kompong Chhnang !!!

Combat modifiers
Defender: leaders(+), disruption(-), preparation(-), morale(-)
experience(-)
Attacker: leaders(+), leaders(-)

Japanese ground losses:
682 casualties reported
Squads: 12 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 50 destroyed, 3 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 4 (4 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Vehicles lost 3 (3 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Units retreated 2

Defeated Japanese Units Retreating!

Assaulting units:
671th Tank Destroyer Battalion

Defending units:
12th Port Unit
78th Infantry Regiment
15th JAAF AF Bn

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

Ground combat at 63,65 (near Pakse)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 1020 troops, 3 guns, 146 vehicles, Assault Value = 90

Defending force 1064 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1

Allied adjusted assault: 58

Japanese adjusted defense: 13

Allied assault odds: 4 to 1

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

Japanese ground losses:
352 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 18 destroyed, 7 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Units retreated 1

Defeated Japanese Units Retreating!

Assaulting units:
632nd Tank Destroyer Battalion
2/11th Armoured Car Regiment

Defending units:
28th Air Flotilla

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

Ground combat at Tourane (66,65)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 1152 troops, 0 guns, 215 vehicles, Assault Value = 398

Defending force 3239 troops, 64 guns, 16 vehicles, Assault Value = 129

Allied adjusted assault: 52

Japanese adjusted defense: 105

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

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), op mode(-), disruption(-), preparation(-)
fatigue(-), morale(-), experience(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
308 casualties reported
Squads: 15 destroyed, 5 disabled
Non Combat: 6 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 11 (3 destroyed, 8 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
Vehicles lost 3 (1 destroyed, 2 disabled)

Assaulting units:
2/5th Armoured Regiment
2/4th Armoured Regiment
23rd Australian Brigade
22nd Australian Brigade

Defending units:
23rd Ind.Mixed Brigade
110th/B Division
2nd RF Gun Battalion

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

The 28th Air Flotilla in the jungle near Pakse is putting up quite the lopsided fight! Tomorrow at Tourane the two newly arrived infantry Bdes will attack while the armoured Rgts stand ready to pursue.

About 8x B-24D1 were lost over Batavia. We're going ahead of our ability to concentrate 4EB and adding that to pulling out excellent crews in favor of rookies (to feed the B-29 groups) means we are bound to have rough spots.

Three divisions from SoPac and PacAO were sent to SEAC to help break through in Burma and hold the last line in China. They are now beginning preparations for invading Takao. The major SEAC forces will advance down the peninsula to eventually liberate Singapore while the major SWPac forces advance into China in support of Chinese Army forces. The invasion of of Formosa, beginning with Takao, is a long way off, after the invasion of Okinawa and surrounding islands. Major USN elements due for AA suite upgrades that are not already on the way are heading back to Pearl Harbor or in some cases Truk.

Intel. About 100 more Imperial land points destroyed.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Crackaces)

Post #: 2556

RE: 1944 July 21 - 7/9/2015 6:24:57 PM

witpqs

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

Tokyo yielded no more strategic points but the fires are still smoldering.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

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

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2557

RE: 1944 July 21 - 7/9/2015 6:25:24 PM

witpqs

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

Here is a look at Japanese movements seen underway.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

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

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2558

RE: 1944 July 21 - 7/9/2015 6:47:49 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Here is a look at Japanese movements seen underway.

Sir Robin LIVES! Either that or the enemy troops have seen your killer bunnies!

On another topic - I have not used TD units much yet in my games but I get the impression they are a bit overpowered in the way they cause huge casualties to infantry. Sure they had a big gun, but the Wolverine would have a limited ready-use ammo supply, and at least some of it was likely anti-tank. I suspect an enemy infantry unit would be able to scatter before the cannon and m/g took out hundreds of them. Either that or they would have attacked and thrown grenades into the open-top AFVs. Anyone else wonder if the Wolverines look too effective in situations they were not designed for?

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2559

RE: 1944 July 21 - 7/9/2015 7:02:53 PM

witpqs

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Here is a look at Japanese movements seen underway.

Sir Robin LIVES! Either that or the enemy troops have seen your killer bunnies!

On another topic - I have not used TD units much yet in my games but I get the impression they are a bit overpowered in the way they cause huge casualties to infantry. Sure they had a big gun, but the Wolverine would have a limited ready-use ammo supply, and at least some of it was likely anti-tank. I suspect an enemy infantry unit would be able to scatter before the cannon and m/g took out hundreds of them. Either that or they would have attacked and thrown grenades into the open-top AFVs. Anyone else wonder if the Wolverines look too effective in situations they were not designed for?

Interesting. In this case they (plus armoured cars) and their organic infantry were up against non-combat troops. So in this case I see nothing amiss. I'll be on the lookout, though.

Since I have the game open it's easy to take a quick snapshot...

Infantry (recce) squads, armored cars, and mortars all organic to the USA TD Bns. That might be different than stock scen 1 was. This is a more balanced force that is not as vulnerable to infantry as if it were only TDs.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

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

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 2560

RE: 1944 July 21 - 7/10/2015 12:52:26 AM

witpqs

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

BB: I thought you were talking about the support unit near Pakse, but I just realized you might have been talking about the units at Kompong Chhnang - is that the battle you meant?

It's a more extreme example and the TD Bn was alone, but the general comments still hold, plus those units had already been retreated and were in clear terrain under heavy air attack. Not terribly surprised as that one was more or less the equivalent of pursuing a routed force.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2561

RE: 1944 July 21 - 7/10/2015 1:41:26 AM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

Yes, the Kompong Chhnang one was the one that stood out for me. I would have no issues if the TDs were rolling up to concrete bunkers and blasting them, but trying to hit large numbers of scattering troops seems like whack-a-mole. You are correct that I did not realize there were organic armoured cars and a few recce squads with the TDs. I don't think the Wolverine units in my game have them - just some support trucks.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2562

RE: 1944 July 21 - 7/16/2015 1:17:00 AM

zuluhour

Posts: 5244
Joined: 1/20/2011
From: Maryland
Status: offline

Looks like '41 Malaya in reverse. By the way, I am having fun with Intelmonkey.

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 2563

1944 July 22 - 7/16/2015 2:15:02 AM

witpqs

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

1944 July 22

The Empire captured:

The Allies captured:
Tourane

There were Imperial amphibious or airborne operations at:

There were Allied amphibious or airborne operations at:
Dili
Brunei

Naval Bombardments

quote:

Allied Ships Bombarding Pagan
Allied Ships Bombarding Peleliu

Our subs got an xAK.

Quiet in China.

Our armour has caught up to the Imperial forces 1 hex NW of Bangkok and will attack to try and retreat them into Bangkok rather than let them escape toward Singapore. The two infantry divisions will arrive tomorrow too late for the attack. The pursuits and races to close gaps in northern Thailand continue.

Our armor has reached the road to Udon Thani, arriving simultaneously with two unidentified Imperial units, and will attack with B-25D1 air support. The enemy unit that had been in that hex (and engaged as far back as Ubon) slipped away into Udon Thani. There are 3 units seen in Udon Thani, with movement arrows to the east toward Vinh. One more day for full combat power to arrive at Kratie before assaulting the defenders there. Tourane is ours, and our armour pursued to Hue where they will attack tomorrow. I think the chances are good of seizing Hue outright.

quote:

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

Ground combat at Tourane (66,65)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 8901 troops, 152 guns, 50 vehicles, Assault Value = 399

Defending force 2510 troops, 54 guns, 16 vehicles, Assault Value = 112

Allied engineers reduce fortifications to 0

Allied adjusted assault: 87

Japanese adjusted defense: 35

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

Allied forces CAPTURE Tourane !!!

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

Japanese ground losses:
1052 casualties reported
Squads: 28 destroyed, 32 disabled
Non Combat: 25 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 8 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 34 (34 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Vehicles lost 9 (9 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Units retreated 1

Allied ground losses:
38 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Defeated Japanese Units Retreating!

Assaulting units:
23rd Australian Brigade
2/4th Armoured Regiment
2/5th Armoured Regiment
22nd Australian Brigade

Defending units:
110th/B Division
2nd RF Gun Battalion

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

Much Imperial activity is now visible in northern Indochina with the commencement of aerial recon there. Vinh sports bombers. Hanoi has fighters and bombers. Ground units are at those cities plus at Haiphong, and one seen moving through Lang Son. But unless Imperial units fight their way out of Thailand we have them cut off, and soon will cut the route to Singapore. Engineer units have begun arriving at Quinhon so airfield construction will proceed much faster.

Our destroyers are beginning to use the repair shipyard at Saigon! Brunei is invaded, no enemy present. Troops will finish unloading tomorrow while those ashore seize the base, then move overland toward Miri. There is an enemy unit at Beaufort that will have to be dealt with, possibly the armoured unit from Jesselton.

We now have dedicated artillery support at Dili, and given the results of the artillery duel the first attack will be tomorrow.

quote:

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

Ground combat at Dili (71,115)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 4367 troops, 38 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 181

Defending force 4688 troops, 70 guns, 91 vehicles, Assault Value = 154

Japanese ground losses:
24 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Assaulting units:
57th Infantry Regiment
2nd Recon Regiment
24th Nav Gsn Unit
47th JNAF AF Unit

Defending units:
30th Australian Brigade
Provisional GMC Grp

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

Ground combat at Dili (71,115)

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 4688 troops, 70 guns, 91 vehicles, Assault Value = 154

Defending force 6610 troops, 52 guns, 42 vehicles, Assault Value = 179

Japanese ground losses:
124 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 13 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Assaulting units:
30th Australian Brigade
Provisional GMC Grp

Defending units:
57th Infantry Regiment
2nd Recon Regiment
24th Nav Gsn Unit
47th JNAF AF Unit

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

Imperials are busy at Torishima, and a Zero CAP caught our Avengers without escort in the morning, downing about 9 (including ops). In the afternoon Thunderbolt CAP accounted for maybe 8x Zeroes, plus the Avengers finished off the ship.

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Torishima at 111,68

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid spotted at 10 NM, estimated altitude 8,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 4 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 6

Allied aircraft
TBF-1 Avenger x 14

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
TBF-1 Avenger: 4 destroyed, 1 damaged

Japanese Ships
xAK Seito Maru, Bomb hits 1

Aircraft Attacking:
8 x TBF-1 Avenger bombing from 5000 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
302 Ku S-1 with A6M5 Zero (6 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
6 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 15000.
Raid is overhead

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Torishima at 111,68

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid spotted at 3 NM, estimated altitude 8,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 1 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 8

Allied aircraft
P-47D25 Thunderbolt x 17
TBF-1 Avenger x 7

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5 Zero: 4 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
P-47D25 Thunderbolt: 1 destroyed
TBF-1 Avenger: 1 damaged

Japanese Ships
xAK Seito Maru, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk

Aircraft Attacking:
7 x TBF-1 Avenger launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 22.4in Mk 13 Torp.

CAP engaged:
302 Ku S-1 with A6M5 Zero (8 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
8 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 15000.
Raid is overhead

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

We've got lots of carriers and other ships headed back to Pearl Harbor for upgrades and repairs. Six CLAA will conduct repairs at Saigon with the destroyers.

A look at Indochina, et al.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

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

(in reply to zuluhour)

Post #: 2564

RE: 1944 July 21 - 7/16/2015 2:16:26 AM

witpqs

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: zuluhour

Looks like '41 Malaya in reverse. By the way, I am having fun with Intelmonkey.

Good! I'm glad it's helpful.

It does look a bit like that. I've even been thinking about where I can land on the eastern side of the peninsula.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to zuluhour)

Post #: 2565

RE: 1944 July 21 - 7/16/2015 3:38:18 AM

Rio Bravo

Posts: 1794
Joined: 7/13/2013
From: Grass Valley, California
Status: offline

witpqs-

This is sure fun to follow!

You mentioned that you're thinking on finding a spot on the Eastern side of the peninsula...like where? And, you have troops to compose such landing force?

Best Regards,

-Terry

_____________________________

"No one throws me my own guns and tells me to run. No one."

-Bret (James Coburn); The Magnificent Seven

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2566

RE: 1944 July 21 - 7/16/2015 6:13:04 AM

witpqs

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rio Bravo

witpqs-

This is sure fun to follow!

You mentioned that you're thinking on finding a spot on the Eastern side of the peninsula...like where? And, you have troops to compose such landing force?

Best Regards,

-Terry

Thanks, Terry!

Well, I sort of put that thought on the shelf a couple of turns ago. Basically, I could use the USN APA to lift some SEAC unit(s) with carrier cover, and at least threaten to cut the rail line down the peninsula. Maybe land at a likely base (forget at the moment which one I was looking at but I think it is currently a size 2 port) and march a couple of hexes (on a road) to cut the rail line between bases. Trouble is twofold: it would take units away from what they are doing now (as you imply), and second it would require a commitment of support until supplies and other support could be rendered via land. And that would divert resources from getting ready for Okinawa. So I put it aside, but it's always an option for further on in the campaign to take Singapore.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Rio Bravo)

Post #: 2567

RE: 1944 July 21 - 7/16/2015 6:41:37 AM

RogerJNeilson

Posts: 1277
Joined: 4/12/2012
From: Bedlington, Northumberland, UK
Status: offline

Landings on the Eastern side of the Malayan coastline are fun, and even if they don't do a massive amount of damage they can easily cut the lines of communication to forces in the north, plus give the Imperials a huge headache at little actual cost. Almost everything there has decent defensive terrain so any units dropped there are very difficult to dislodge.

Sept 44 in my game and I have Imperials pocketed all over the place by smallish invasions. Mind you air superiority is a must.

Roger

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

An unplanned dynasty: Roger Neilson, Roger Neilson 11, Roger Neilson 3 previous posts 898+1515 + 1126 = 3539.....Finally completed my game which started the day WITP:AE was released

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2568

RE: 1944 July 21 - 7/16/2015 4:38:47 PM

witpqs

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

I think it was either Kota Bharu or Patani that I was looking at as a possible site. Singora would be a direct cut so I figure better garrisoned until he withdraws past there.

Air superiority - check, and he's got a zillion flying zombies in Singapore so that would really divert my carriers for too long a time given other plans.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to RogerJNeilson)

Post #: 2569

RE: 1944 July 21 - 7/17/2015 6:10:00 AM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

Get some troops from India, put them on APDs and FT them to Victoria Point, then march one hex to Chumphon. Rail line cut and peninsula divided. It looks far enough north to avoid attacks from the horde of light bombers at Singers.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2570

RE: 1944 July 21 - 7/17/2015 6:45:22 AM

witpqs

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

The only troops in India are on garrison duty.

I do have a unit preparing for Victoria Point (IIRC). It's in the early stages, but I haven't done aerial recon on the place yet. I was debating whether I should just take it by land. I suspect that DAW HQ is pulling all forces farther south than VP/Chumphon.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 2571

RE: 1944 July 21 - 7/17/2015 7:04:58 AM

RogerJNeilson

Posts: 1277
Joined: 4/12/2012
From: Bedlington, Northumberland, UK
Status: offline

Would agree. Victoria Point is a very interesting place, but given the state of play in IndoChina/Malaya its no longer got the specific importance it once had - you are already into his LOC all over the place. The action has moved on from there now and it will be a backwater. Only advantage from now on is the port once taken and developed gives a reasonable other link for dropping supply to the Malaya and IndoChina areas while Singapore and the area round here is still held by the Imperials. Victoria Point - Chumphon and you are on the rail net for supply transport.

Roger

_____________________________

An unplanned dynasty: Roger Neilson, Roger Neilson 11, Roger Neilson 3 previous posts 898+1515 + 1126 = 3539.....Finally completed my game which started the day WITP:AE was released

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2572

RE: 1944 July 21 - 7/17/2015 9:46:03 AM

Rio Bravo

Posts: 1794
Joined: 7/13/2013
From: Grass Valley, California
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rio Bravo

witpqs-

This is sure fun to follow!

You mentioned that you're thinking on finding a spot on the Eastern side of the peninsula...like where? And, you have troops to compose such landing force?

Best Regards,

-Terry

Thanks, Terry!

Well, I sort of put that thought on the shelf a couple of turns ago. Basically, I could use the USN APA to lift some SEAC unit(s) with carrier cover, and at least threaten to cut the rail line down the peninsula. Maybe land at a likely base (forget at the moment which one I was looking at but I think it is currently a size 2 port) and march a couple of hexes (on a road) to cut the rail line between bases. Trouble is twofold: it would take units away from what they are doing now (as you imply), and second it would require a commitment of support until supplies and other support could be rendered via land. And that would divert resources from getting ready for Okinawa. So I put it aside, but it's always an option for further on in the campaign to take Singapore.

Ummm, think I am too new on the learning curve to imply anything, witpqs. I''m chuckling right now.

I was just thinking that with everything you have dumped into Indochina that you might be running low on troops.

In any event, your AAR sure is great fun to read!

Best Regards,

Terry

_____________________________

"No one throws me my own guns and tells me to run. No one."

-Bret (James Coburn); The Magnificent Seven

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2573

RE: 1944 July 21 - 7/17/2015 4:23:00 PM

witpqs

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

I am running low on troops! Not in the absolute sense, but considering upcoming commitments.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Rio Bravo)

Post #: 2574

RE: 1944 July 21 - 7/17/2015 5:01:09 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

I am running low on troops! Not in the absolute sense, but considering upcoming commitments.

Good to hear!

How are you doing for ships and planes and pilots?

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2575

RE: 1944 July 22 - 7/17/2015 7:07:49 PM

witpqs

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

Ships, quite good but "there are never enough destroyers". I've also beaten the heck out of my modern USN BBs. Some Essex CVs are upgraded already but a bunch (maybe most of them (are heading to Pearl for their very important June '44 AA suite upgrade. Something tells me that every gun barrel will be needed around Okinawa. For heavily damaged vessels the journey to Pearl Harbor is now long: the geography catching up with me.

Planes, pretty good. I still have useful pools of many (but certainly not all) discontinued aircraft. Trying to use all marks of the P-38 and the first model of the Corsair, for example. Still have a few dozen of the P-47D2 and many hundreds of the P-47D25 but those have to last until March or April of '45. Have upgraded a number of British, et al squadrons to Thunderbolt and Spitfire VIII, which will be used to reduce pressure on P-47 pools.

Pilots, a little different. A little quirk with this version of Babes (maybe in all Stock & Babes version, dunno) is that there are 0 Commonwealth replacement pilots. I've got a Commonwealth Hellcat carrier squadron that is short one pilot and will never get more. Trivial overall. Henceforth "pilots" = "trained pilots in the reserve pool" unless context is otherwise. British fighter pilots are always in short supply but we have a few as light losses in the recent past have allowed supply to catch up with demand to some degree. USA fighter pilots are good, as are NZ and Australian. USN fighter pilots are a little thin and we train like crazy on shore. It is simply not possible to have enough pilots for all the CVE so they basically get enough time before commitment to battle to train their own.

British bomber pilots are short with active squadrons training rookies, but anti-Nav squadrons are OK. Australian and New Zealand bomber pilots are OK except for Aus high-ground pilots to fill out the newly arriving 4EB squadrons. A number of squadrons are low-ground/low-nav or torpedo. USA bombers very fragmented by mission. Non-B-29 4EB are now a mixed bag. Still a number of very good pilots but many groups are training rookies. B-29 have the cream of the crop, except where some excellent pilots are in squadrons that have not yet been raided for pilots. I hope to keep USA 4EB operating with SEAC mostly intact until Hong Kong, Canton, and maybe Singapore industries are out of action. Many attack bombers (AB) are training rookies alongside very good to excellent pilots because of the heavy attrition in those types when they begin attacking low. USMC pilots in good shape for all assignments.

There are certainly more details, but that's a good overview. Ask specifics if you want (please don't make me count numbers of pilots on screen!).

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2576

RE: 1944 July 22 - 7/18/2015 12:24:47 AM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

witpqs: British bomber pilots are short

This is good - easier to fit into the cockpit that way ...

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2577

RE: 1944 July 22 - 7/18/2015 4:13:11 AM

witpqs

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

witpqs: British bomber pilots are short

This is good - easier to fit into the cockpit that way ...

Redux: British bomber pilots are short, but man can they fly!

_____________________________

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

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 2578

RE: 1944 July 22 - 7/18/2015 11:30:52 AM

Lowpe

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

You took Cam Ranh Bay on June 26th with a loss of 4 vehicles destroyed. Since then you have taken the south.

I was looking at some of pictures you posted, and simply going by color hue (not the the best estimate) and directional arrows, it seems to me almost nothing Japan has west of central Thai plains has retreated to the Vinh area.

Is that your assessment?

Also, I was adding up a rough estimate of days of travel needed for the large slug of Japanese troops around Chiang Mai to make it back to Japanese lines and it is not encouraging (for Japan).

In one month you have dealt a severe blow to Japan...not counting the victories at sea. It is a whole new game where the Allies are now limited by prep and internal problems and not so much by the Japanese.

Very Well done at winning a war of maneuver.

(for now).

PS: tough luck on the commonwealth pilots!

I am looking forward to Okinawa, which I think is a mistake on your part if in fact there are as many troops there as you posit.

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 7/18/2015 12:32:17 PM >

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2579

RE: 1944 July 22 - 7/18/2015 5:59:34 PM

witpqs

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

You took Cam Ranh Bay on June 26th with a loss of 4 vehicles destroyed. Since then you have taken the south.

I was looking at some of pictures you posted, and simply going by color hue (not the the best estimate) and directional arrows, it seems to me almost nothing Japan has west of central Thai plains has retreated to the Vinh area.

Is that your assessment?
Pretty much. I've seen a few times a unit at Udon Thani with a movement arrow east. I doubt many have gotten through there, but don't know if it's 2 or 5 or what they were. The TD Bn currently moving out of Pakse is headed to a road junction where it can cut off any slower movement from Udon Thani to Vinh, but any armoured units will have out run them by the time they get there.

Also, I was adding up a rough estimate of days of travel needed for the large slug of Japanese troops around Chiang Mai to make it back to Japanese lines and it is not encouraging (for Japan).

In one month you have dealt a severe blow to Japan...not counting the victories at sea. It is a whole new game where the Allies are now limited by prep and internal problems and not so much by the Japanese.

Very Well done at winning a war of maneuver. (for now).

PS: tough luck on the commonwealth pilots!

I am looking forward to Okinawa, which I think is a mistake on your part if in fact there are as many troops there as you posit.

Thanks!

Last turn I saw about 80k troops between the two bases. Recon of the northern base was just back up to snuff, so there still could be more (as I think I saw some time ago).

I hadn't looked back at the CRB D-Day date: not quite a month! I've felt like I'm behind on things the whole time, which I guess is normal for that type of situation. I think part of the scenario is FOW, in this case on the side of DAW HQ. Walter simply couldn't know how much I was committing there, and always assuming the worst has a cost all its own. If not for the course of events following Pegu D-Day, the situation surrounding CRB would have been much more like I had envisioned. Significant Imperial opposition would have crystalized around a very strong Allied enclave that would have provided the intended benefits of the op. Instead, the Imperial forces beyond Pegu stayed a little too far forward a little too long. A number could not get back to Rangoon before being mauled. Rangoon was stubborn but doomed. The troops retreating through Chiang Mai were firmly blocked from other routes to safety.

The troops lost or currently cut off would have provided for a new defensive line plus blocked off advance out of the CRB area (not sure how many surrounding bases I could have grabbed before defense solidified). The new defense line, of course, would not have been permanent, but it would have been quite a different situation from this. The presence of significant Allied ground troops in a CRB enclave would have made the new line always tenuous, but now we have the Allies advancing rapidly for a while longer and then continuing to advance through tougher opposition.

The bonus is that the RN & allied navies really smote the IJN, preserving USN assets for other ops.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2580