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: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4

 
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: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 Page: <<   < prev  9 10 [11] 12 13   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/26/2013 1:11:09 AM   
catwhoorg


Posts: 686
Joined: 9/27/2012
From: Uk expat lving near Atlanta
Status: offline
Tahiti makes a decent fueling spot for diverted convoys.

Buildable to level 5 port and level 6 airfield.


If he drives south to Soamoa, you can run Tahiti to Dunedin, that takes the convoys well South.

(in reply to pws1225)
Post #: 301
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/26/2013 1:27:34 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline
It's 19:26 local on Christmas day and John mailed the moves to me earlier this morning ( or was it late last night? ) and I'm going
through the TF's deciding which to divert and which to leave alone and I found a USN TF that appears to be a convoy of damaged
BB's to Alameda and the shipyard there. I hope it gets there okie dokie.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to pws1225)
Post #: 302
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/26/2013 2:01:59 AM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline
It looks like Jim is going to risk a CM to lay 100 mines on Canton island's port. Well, good for him. I like this idea.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 303
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/26/2013 2:44:11 AM   
CaptBeefheart


Posts: 2301
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline
Merry Christmas, gents. Have you set up a Cape Town to Oz convoy run yet? Each time I play this game I put more emphasis into that supply/fuel channel.

Cheers,
CC

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 304
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/26/2013 2:16:11 PM   
Simonsez


Posts: 110
Joined: 12/7/2011
Status: offline
Conventional wisdom typically leaves warships in at least pierside repair until systems damage is down to zero before attempting any long distance, open ocean transits. Remember that 25% systems damage means that in effect, 25% of your damage control is not working (I'm sure th actual math is more complicated, but still a major risk).

Only Ole Miss is ready to go to the West Coast at this time, I would recommend that the others stay in pierside repair until systems damge is down to zero before they transit. Once in transit to the West Coast, you have no safe harbors to duck into should floatation damage increase in transit. I don't understand the need and risk you are assuming to move them at this time. Is there a battleship parade in San Francisco Harbor that they might miss?



_____________________________

Simonsez

It's a trap!

(in reply to CaptBeefheart)
Post #: 305
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/26/2013 2:45:43 PM   
Simonsez


Posts: 110
Joined: 12/7/2011
Status: offline
quote:

It looks like Jim is going to risk a CM to lay 100 mines on Canton island's port. Well, good for him. I like this idea.


Why?

Think about this. Is Canton Is. worth 100 mines and will that stop your opponent from taking the Island? It might make you feel good if something hits a random mine, but isn't your team taking a layered, defense in depth possibility away from another, more critical location? What about 100 mines at Midway since you have reinforced there? Or, wouldn't those mines be better at Johnston, Palmyra, Pago Pago, Suva, Nadi or Tahiti - maybe combined with another 100 mines? Maybe backed up by CD guns, significant troops, air and sea assests? This action smells alot like a "I've got to do something, somewhere." response that is natural for the Allies in this phase of the game. I don't see a strategy in this decision and to me that means you are just wasting more of the precious few assets the Allies have at the beginning of the game.



_____________________________

Simonsez

It's a trap!

(in reply to Simonsez)
Post #: 306
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/26/2013 4:50:46 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline
Jon has already taken Canton so I can only imagine it is to interdict his use of it.

_____________________________


(in reply to Simonsez)
Post #: 307
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/26/2013 5:34:13 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Wargmr
Jon has already taken Canton so I can only imagine it is to interdict his use of it.

Yeah, I was going to say, the Japs already have Canton island so Jim putting some mines there w/ his CM is supposed to sink any
AK's or AP's that come to supply the island or something like that. I would have done the same thing Jim is doing. And yes, it
probably is being done out of the need to do "something" rather than nothing at all. The USN is going to get CM's out their ears and
if the mines being laid sink just one Jap ship it's worth it to me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Commander Cody
Merry Christmas, gents. Have you set up a Cape Town to Oz convoy run yet? Each time I play this game I put more emphasis into that supply/fuel channel.

Yes I have. And there are already a bunch of ships in the pipeline and Perth is due to be getting it's first shipment in a day or two.
And yes, I like this route as it's almost free of IJN subs. The route from Colombo to Perth is worrying. That's a long way in dangerous
waters. I'm thinking of sending them to Cape Town first and then to Perth to take advantage of the safer route.

(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 308
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/26/2013 5:57:45 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline
I like to run the perth route REALLY far south and across and back up north to Perth.

Jon will raid this area during the war at some time.


_____________________________


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 309
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/26/2013 6:06:51 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline
OK. I've gotten some moves from John and I watched the combat replay and there was this one surface action at Canton island that
caught the Japs off guard and sank a couple of ships.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 310
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/26/2013 6:13:18 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline
And here's an event where John bombards Oosthaven.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 311
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/26/2013 6:20:22 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline
Jim and I lost some B-17's when this base folded.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 312
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/26/2013 6:41:48 PM   
witpqs


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

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson

OK. I've gotten some moves from John and I watched the combat replay and there was this one surface action at Canton island that
caught the Japs off guard and sank a couple of ships.




You boys are not going quietly into the night!

_____________________________


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 313
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/26/2013 6:49:20 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline
There's three tankers and a bunch of AK's carrying about 38K barrels of fuel to Colombo but I think, since it's got to go to Perth anyway,
I think I'm going to send them to Cape Town when they appear on the map just to get them off the map again. And then from Cape Town
to Perth using a small amount of fuel in the process. Sounds good.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 314
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/26/2013 7:29:21 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline
I've got a medium size collection of smaller ships and they are as good as sunk even now but to get some further use out of them I'm
moving them to Tarakan to use them as bait for the fighters there. Maybe I'll get a Jap plane or two out of this deal. There's virtually
no chance for them to make it to Soerabaja or Darwin. Jap planes would sink them somewhere.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 315
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/26/2013 7:55:41 PM   
Encircled


Posts: 2024
Joined: 12/30/2010
From: Northern England
Status: offline
Hi Larry, judging by that screen shot the planes at Tarakan are either bombers or floatplanes.

Rather than having them in a bunch to be sunk at the Japanese players leisure, why don't you scatter them and run them in single ship TF's to try to make safety?

BTW, if John is attempting to isolate Oz, he's probably going to be sending a fair few subs to take station of Perth, so you are going to need ASW assets down there.

Good hit with that TF at Canton, that looks like some Air Support thats now on the bottom of the sea!

_____________________________


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 316
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/26/2013 8:12:03 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Encircled
Hi Larry, judging by that screen shot the planes at Tarakan are either bombers or floatplanes.

Now that you've said that I'm not sure but I thought that they were Dutch fighters and some German-built seaplanes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Encircled
Rather than having them in a bunch to be sunk at the Japanese players leisure, why don't you scatter them and run them in single ship TF's to try to make safety?

I didn't know if we're still in the "early" phase of the game since the house rule was no single-ship TF's except for the early phase of
the game. It just seemed "gamey" to me to put them into singlet formations.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Encircled
BTW, if John is attempting to isolate Oz, he's probably going to be sending a fair few subs to take station of Perth, so you are going to need ASW assets down there.

And those are hard to come by right about now. I'll see what I can do to scrape up some DD's or something.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Encircled
Good hit with that TF at Canton, that looks like some Air Support thats now on the bottom of the sea!

That was Jim's idea. He's pretty handy to have around. Especially lately.

(in reply to Encircled)
Post #: 317
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/26/2013 8:35:47 PM   
Cap Mandrake


Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson
I didn't know if we're still in the "early" phase of the game since the house rule was no single-ship TF's except for the early phase of
the game. It just seemed "gamey" to me to put them into singlet formations.


It doesn't seem remotely gamey for merchies to flee the DEI in Dec 41. Most of them probably weren't even under military control. Considering the alternative would be internment in a camp or death or both, it would be the only rational decision.

Even so, you guys were organized enough to list your house rules:

quote:

The use of One ship TF is allowed if the ships are warships or it is the first two weeks of December 1941 (the fleeing Thundering Herd).


First two weeks of December might mean through Dec 14 or it might mean first two weeks after the starting whistle (Dec 21). Either way, you seem to be past it.

Of course, you could put them in TWO-ship convoys.

< Message edited by Cap Mandrake -- 12/26/2013 9:37:10 PM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 318
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/26/2013 8:39:04 PM   
Cap Mandrake


Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline
Also, the game date is the same as the actual date. Congratulations!

(in reply to Cap Mandrake)
Post #: 319
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/26/2013 8:39:41 PM   
Lecivius


Posts: 4845
Joined: 8/5/2007
From: Denver
Status: offline
"I didn't know if we're still in the "early" phase of the game since the house rule was no single-ship TF's except for the early phase of
the game. It just seemed "gamey" to me to put them into singlet formations. "

It's your call. Wisdom states if it feels gamey, it probably is. But IMHO, this is still "early phase".

My 2 cents.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 320
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/27/2013 2:32:31 AM   
CaptBeefheart


Posts: 2301
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson



quote:

ORIGINAL: Commander Cody
Merry Christmas, gents. Have you set up a Cape Town to Oz convoy run yet? Each time I play this game I put more emphasis into that supply/fuel channel.

Yes I have. And there are already a bunch of ships in the pipeline and Perth is due to be getting it's first shipment in a day or two.
And yes, I like this route as it's almost free of IJN subs. The route from Colombo to Perth is worrying. That's a long way in dangerous
waters. I'm thinking of sending them to Cape Town first and then to Perth to take advantage of the safer route.


Sound like you guys are quite on top of things. Good to hear. I'd recommend using Karachi to Cape Town as a fuel and possibly supply route since he'd have to go way north to inderdict it (you can stockpile fuel at Karachi when needed). Also, you might consider sending port-building engineers and naval support to one of those bases south of Perth (Albany if memory serves) and use it as the main convoy destination. Another tip is to route the Cape Town to Oz convoys pretty far south using waypoints. Apologies if you've already thought of all this.

Cheers,
CC

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 321
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/27/2013 3:24:04 AM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 5358
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
quote:

It's your call. Wisdom states if it feels gamey, it probably is. But IMHO, this is still "early phase".


+1

If we're still in 1941, it's still early in the game.

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to Lecivius)
Post #: 322
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/27/2013 12:50:25 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4232
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline
I dont think it is gamey at all. Until those ships reach a port they are still fleeing for their lives.


_____________________________


(in reply to Capt. Harlock)
Post #: 323
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/27/2013 11:05:16 PM   
DOCUP


Posts: 3073
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline
Nice job with that amphib TFs guys.  I like to use subs to lay mines at the mouth of the river that heads to Pbang.  One thing with mines is once they are detected they are easy to avoid.  At least I see that in my game.

(in reply to Mike McCreery)
Post #: 324
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/29/2013 6:54:00 PM   
moore4807


Posts: 1089
Joined: 6/2/2000
From: Punta Gorda FL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Simonsez

quote:

It looks like Jim is going to risk a CM to lay 100 mines on Canton island's port. Well, good for him. I like this idea.


Why?

Think about this. Is Canton Is. worth 100 mines and will that stop your opponent from taking the Island? It might make you feel good if something hits a random mine, but isn't your team taking a layered, defense in depth possibility away from another, more critical location? What about 100 mines at Midway since you have reinforced there? Or, wouldn't those mines be better at Johnston, Palmyra, Pago Pago, Suva, Nadi or Tahiti - maybe combined with another 100 mines? Maybe backed up by CD guns, significant troops, air and sea assests? This action smells alot like a "I've got to do something, somewhere." response that is natural for the Allies in this phase of the game. I don't see a strategy in this decision and to me that means you are just wasting more of the precious few assets the Allies have at the beginning of the game.





I sent the Oglala (CM) to Canton escorted by the CA/CL/DD SCTF because in my previous experience the 0 sized ports unload VERY slowly. I did not figure I would catch the TF with 2K of troops still on it! However dropping 100 mines on the port cant hurt and I also have mines placed at Johnston and Midway too. (subs did that)

Now for my next stupid/brilliant move, I see John sending replacements to Canton in smaller TF's - I plan to keep a CL/DD TF in the area to interdict this threat too.

And you are absolutely correct simonsez - it was a knee jerk reaction to send the CM there, but I NEED to make him cautious about what WE are going to do too. You are totally correct we are defensive and its way too early to be thinking offensively, but I want him to think twice about freely landing troops anywhere, so in that regard this time- mission accomplished!

_____________________________


(in reply to Simonsez)
Post #: 325
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/29/2013 6:57:01 PM   
moore4807


Posts: 1089
Joined: 6/2/2000
From: Punta Gorda FL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cap Mandrake

Also, the game date is the same as the actual date. Congratulations!



Welcome aboard Cap.
As a big fan of your AAR, I'm honored by your visit!

I wish we could say we did that on purpose...

_____________________________


(in reply to Cap Mandrake)
Post #: 326
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/29/2013 6:59:35 PM   
moore4807


Posts: 1089
Joined: 6/2/2000
From: Punta Gorda FL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DOCUP

Nice job with that amphib TFs guys.  I like to use subs to lay mines at the mouth of the river that heads to Pbang.  One thing with mines is once they are detected they are easy to avoid.  At least I see that in my game.


Thanks DOCUP!

I'm hoping in 1942 to start isolating his Eastern Pacific bases (including Kwajalein) by mines and subs and SCTF raids... The more I tie up his forces there - the less he will have to attack Austalia/India!

_____________________________


(in reply to DOCUP)
Post #: 327
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/31/2013 8:46:32 AM   
moore4807


Posts: 1089
Joined: 6/2/2000
From: Punta Gorda FL
Status: offline
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Dec 24, 41
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It may be FOW, but we'll take it! I heard mine hit sounds last turn too!

TF 75 encounters mine field at Pago Pago (148,161)

Japanese Ships
SS I-169, Mine hits 1, on fire, heavy damage

Larry reported already we lost Cagayan, but for the record...

Morning Air attack on 1st Kure Assault Division, at 79,89 (Cagayan)
Weather in hex: Thunderstorms
Raid spotted at 20 NM, estimated altitude 18,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 5 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-27b Nate x 21

Allied aircraft
B-17D Fortress x 9

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
B-17D Fortress: 4 damaged

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


Enemy Zeroes fly at 26K, Bomb run @ 5K, USA lives to fight another day!

Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Lucena at 79,79
Weather in hex: Clear sky
Raid spotted at 14 NM, estimated altitude 6,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 7 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 2

Allied aircraft
SOC-1 Seagull x 3

No Japanese losses

No Allied losses

Japanese Ships
xAP Hoten Maru, Bomb hits 1, on fire

Aircraft Attacking:
3 x SOC-1 Seagull bombing from 5000 feet
Naval Attack: 2 x 250 lb SAP Bomb


This goes on the "I'll deal with this later" file pile!

Ground combat at Baker Island (149,136)
Japanese Shock attack
Attacking force 1458 troops, 10 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 56
Defending force 0 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 0

Japanese adjusted assault: 40
Allied adjusted defense: 1

Japanese assault odds: 40 to 1 (fort level 0)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Baker Island !!!

Combat modifiers
Attacker: shock(+), leaders(-)

Assaulting units:
53rd Naval Guard Unit


Awright, is this the traditional feint by the Japs, or is this John's diabolical plan at work?

Ground combat at Malden Island (175,152)
Japanese Shock attack
Attacking force 1592 troops, 12 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 59
Defending force 0 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 0

Japanese adjusted assault: 44
Allied adjusted defense: 1

Japanese assault odds: 44 to 1 (fort level 0)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Malden Island !!!

Combat modifiers
Attacker: shock(+), leaders(-)

Assaulting units:
61st Naval Guard Unit

*** Added Combat report

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by moore4807 -- 12/31/2013 7:35:10 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to moore4807)
Post #: 328
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/31/2013 9:13:30 AM   
moore4807


Posts: 1089
Joined: 6/2/2000
From: Punta Gorda FL
Status: offline
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Dec 25, 41
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Larry already posted this, but does anyone remember this was the SCTF that received an aerial attack two days ago? Me neither!

Night Time Surface Combat, near Canton Island at 153,143, Range 6,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
PB Tama Maru #5, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
PB Chokai Maru, Shell hits 2
PB Yahada Maru, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
PB Mikitade Maru, Shell hits 19, and is sunk
xAK Tatuharu Maru, Shell hits 21, and is sunk
xAK Terushima Maru, Shell hits 1
xAK Penang Maru, Shell hits 15, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAK Uji Maru, Shell hits 3, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
xAK Yosida Maru #3, Shell hits 2, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
xAK Fukoku Maru, Shell hits 9, and is sunk

Allied Ships
CA Minneapolis
CL Helena, Shell hits 1
DD Ralph Talbot
DD Cummings
DD Case
DD Conyngham

Japanese ground losses:
2165 casualties reported
Squads: 12 destroyed, 6 disabled
Non Combat: 99 destroyed, 65 disabled
Engineers: 16 destroyed, 7 disabled
Guns lost 20 (19 destroyed, 1 disabled)
Vehicles lost 8 (6 destroyed, 2 disabled)


Still subbin it! (wordplay on John's job...) Must get ASW forces built up here!

Sub attack near Channel Islands at 223,78
Japanese Ships
SS I-26

Allied Ships
DD Phelps
DD Farragut


Aleutians Express is coming "Right on down the line"

Amphibious Assault at Amchitka Island (158,52)
TF 202 troops unloading over beach at Amchitka Island, 158,52
Japanese ground losses:
34 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 1 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

17 troops of a SNLF Squad lost in surf during unload of Nanking Nav Gd /2


And WHERE might you be going, my little chick-a-dee?

Morning Air attack on TF, near Kure Island at 151,91
Weather in hex: Heavy cloud
Raid spotted at 10 NM, estimated altitude 7,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 5 minutes

Allied aircraft
PBY-5 Catalina x 5

No Allied losses

Japanese Ships
CL Otonase
xAK Kyosei Maru

Aircraft Attacking:
5 x PBY-5 Catalina bombing from 5000 feet
Naval Attack: 2 x 500 lb SAP Bomb


I'll gladly take this kind of luck... I've never used the floats as bombers before, but I'm beginning to like it!

Morning Air attack on TF, near Iba at 78,73
Weather in hex: Heavy cloud
Raid spotted at 2 NM, estimated altitude 7,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 0 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-27b Nate x 3

Allied aircraft
SOC-1 Seagull x 2

No Japanese losses

No Allied losses

Japanese Ships
xAP Dairen Maru, Bomb hits 1, on fire

Aircraft Attacking:
2 x SOC-1 Seagull bombing from 5000 feet
Naval Attack: 2 x 250 lb SAP Bomb


The final, defiant, middle finger pointing, last moments...

Morning Air attack on 1st Kure Assault Division, at 79,89 (Cagayan)
Weather in hex: Heavy rain
Raid spotted at 19 NM, estimated altitude 18,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 5 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-27b Nate x 13

Allied aircraft
B-17D Fortress x 5

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
B-17D Fortress: 2 damaged

Aircraft Attacking:
2 x B-17D Fortress bombing from 15000 feet *
Ground Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb


Grocery Store is just not getting the goods...

Morning Air attack on TF, near Pago Pago at 152,154
Weather in hex: Overcast
Raid spotted at 16 NM, estimated altitude 18,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 5 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 28
D3A1 Val x 20

Japanese aircraft losses
D3A1 Val: 1 damaged

Allied Ships
xAK Bundaleer, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires
xAK Anna Odland, Bomb hits 2
xAK Iron King, Bomb hits 7, and is sunk


Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Pago Pago at 152,154
Weather in hex: Partial cloud
Raid spotted at 20 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 7 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 23
D3A1 Val x 40

Japanese aircraft losses
D3A1 Val: 1 damaged

Allied Ships
xAK Bundaleer, Bomb hits 5, and is sunk
xAK Anna Odland, Bomb hits 9, and is sunk


John has decided to be a real pest here, hopefully Catalina's are as good as SOC's in lucky bombing.

Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Christmas Island at 174,141
Weather in hex: Light cloud
Raid spotted at 2 NM, estimated altitude 7,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 1 minutes

Allied aircraft
PBY-5 Catalina x 3

No Allied losses

Japanese Ships
DD Wakaba


With a name like... it has to be good! (nothing strategic - just had to post the name of this island!)

Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Pukapuka at 155,155
Weather in hex: Severe storms
Raid spotted at 12 NM, estimated altitude 9,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 4 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 10
B5N2 Kate x 18

Japanese aircraft losses
B5N2 Kate: 1 damaged

Allied Ships
TK Herborg, Torpedo hits 6, and is sunk


Sorta thought they'd hold out longer...but looking at the combat results, I didn't give them much to work with.

Ground combat at Cagayan (79,89)
Japanese Deliberate attack
Attacking force 6735 troops, 69 guns, 3 vehicles, Assault Value = 245
Defending force 5702 troops, 24 guns, 62 vehicles, Assault Value = 140

Japanese adjusted assault: 163
Allied adjusted defense: 57
Japanese assault odds: 2 to 1 (fort level 0)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Cagayan !!!

Allied aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft losses
SOC-1 Seagull: 1 destroyed
B-17D Fortress: 18 destroyed

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

Japanese ground losses:
366 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 39 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Allied ground losses:
2195 casualties reported
Squads: 135 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 221 destroyed, 13 disabled
Engineers: 8 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 9 (8 destroyed, 1 disabled)
Vehicles lost 46 (46 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Units retreated 4
Units destroyed 1

Assaulting units:
90th Infantry Regiment
1st Kure Assault Division

Defending units:
102nd PA Infantry Regiment
3rd PA Constabulary Regiment
1st /101st PA Battalion
Cagayan USAAF Base Force
Mindanao Force Corps


No father, No mother, No Uncle Sam...

Ground combat at Bataan (78,77)
Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 12085 troops, 102 guns, 32 vehicles, Assault Value = 440
Defending force 4125 troops, 187 guns, 125 vehicles, Assault Value = 99

Japanese adjusted assault: 359
Allied adjusted defense: 169

Japanese assault odds: 2 to 1 (fort level 1)
Japanese Assault reduces fortifications to 1

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

Japanese ground losses:
125 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 13 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled

Allied ground losses:
36 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Vehicles lost 13 (1 destroyed, 12 disabled)

Assaulting units:
21st Division

Defending units:
Manila Bay Defenses
Provisional GMC Grp
301st PA Field Artillery Regiment

*** Added Combat Report

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by moore4807 -- 12/31/2013 7:35:55 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to moore4807)
Post #: 329
RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 - 12/31/2013 9:57:03 PM   
larryfulkerson


Posts: 39932
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline
I didn't think it would be possible because of all the escorts in and around the Palembang area but I managed to sneak a sub into the
Palembang port and actually get a transport. Every little bit helps. That sub will probably be severely damaged before it can get out
of there now. It was still worth it.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to moore4807)
Post #: 330
Page:   <<   < prev  9 10 [11] 12 13   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Command Decisions: Yeomen vs. Samurai RA 6.4 Page: <<   < prev  9 10 [11] 12 13   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

1.453