RE: Manila Falls

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: Manila Falls

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: Manila Falls

Page: << < prev 72 73 [74] 75 76 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Manila Falls - 9/3/2016 1:37:40 PM

Lowpe

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

Feb 1, 1943

PM invaded...

Another big attack at LA...after two days of aerial bombing.

Ground combat at Los Angeles (225,76)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 109021 troops, 2056 guns, 4755 vehicles, Assault Value = 3698

Defending force 76272 troops, 1092 guns, 1260 vehicles, Assault Value = 1873

Allied adjusted assault: 2127

Japanese adjusted defense: 5061

Allied assault odds: 1 to 2

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
1929 casualties reported
Squads: 5 destroyed, 190 disabled
Non Combat: 50 destroyed, 16 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 15 disabled
Guns lost 95 (4 destroyed, 91 disabled)
Vehicles lost 112 (63 destroyed, 49 disabled)
Units destroyed 1

Allied ground losses:
5035 casualties reported
Squads: 31 destroyed, 475 disabled
Non Combat: 4 destroyed, 67 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 91 disabled
Guns lost 151 (8 destroyed, 143 disabled)
Vehicles lost 123 (14 destroyed, 109 disabled)

Assaulting units:
7th Motorized Division
36th Infantry Division
5th Armoured Division
104th Infantry Division
13th Armoured Division
Provisional Tank Brigade
41st Infantry Division
8th Motorized Division
3rd Marine Division
LA Harbor Defense
640th Tank Destroyer Battalion
6th Armoured Division
2nd Armored Division
2nd Army Tank Brigade
37th US Naval Construction Battalion
204th Coast AA Regiment
511th Coast AA Regiment
29th USN Special Construction Battalion
21st US Naval Construction Battalion
165th Field Artillery Battalion
183rd Field Artillery Battalion
54th Coastal Artillery Regiment
352nd Construction Regiment
I US Corps
503rd Coast AA Regiment
24th MAG
188th Field Artillery Battalion
19th Base Maint Engineer Battalion
603rd Coast AA Regiment
Los Angeles USN Base Force
3rd USN Naval Construction Regiment
144th Field Artillery Regiment
181st Field Artillery Battalion
168th Field Artillery Battalion
21st Base Maint Engineer Battalion
214th Coast AA Regiment
II USA Corps

Defending units:
23rd Tank Regiment
4th Division
16th Division
1st Tank Division
4th Tank Regiment
2nd Tank Division
9th Division
1st Division
6th Guards Division
18th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
15th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
5th RF Gun Battalion
2nd RF Gun Battalion
9th RF Gun Battalion
7th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
2nd Hvy.Artillery Regiment
15th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
11th RF Gun Battalion
3rd Air Defense AA Regiment
15th Air Defense AA Regiment
10th RF Gun Battalion
7th Air Defense AA Regiment
8th RF Gun Battalion
1st Air Defense AA Battalion
2nd Air Defense AA Regiment
22nd Fld AA Gun Co
12th Ind.AA Gun Co
9th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
3rd Hvy.Artillery Rgt /1

(in reply to Alfred)

Post #: 2191

RE: Manila Falls - 9/3/2016 1:45:56 PM

Lowpe

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

Chungking...

Ground combat at Chungking (76,45)

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 4356 troops, 349 guns, 185 vehicles, Assault Value = 2193

Defending force 167314 troops, 632 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 2604

Allied ground losses:
942 casualties reported
Squads: 46 destroyed, 22 disabled
Non Combat: 3 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 6 (4 destroyed, 2 disabled)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2192

RE: Manila Falls - 9/5/2016 1:42:08 PM

Lowpe

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

Turn is away, and I suspect there will be some fireworks this day!

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2193

RE: Manila Falls - 9/9/2016 6:35:36 PM

DanSez

Posts: 1023
Joined: 2/5/2012
Status: offline

Page saving bump and an echo from this reader:

Fireworks?

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2194

RE: Manila Falls - 9/10/2016 2:57:05 PM

Lowpe

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

I sent the Mutsu and several cruisers and destroyers to intercept the PM landings, but Jocke fled with all his ships...

Leaving Mutsu vulnerable to some air attacks.

Morning Air attack on TF, near Port Moresby at 98,130

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid detected at 36 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 16 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2-N Rufe x 4
Ki-43-IIb Oscar x 12

Allied aircraft
P-38G Lightning x 20
F4F-3 Wildcat x 14
TBF-1 Avenger x 9

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2-N Rufe: 2 destroyed
Ki-43-IIb Oscar: 3 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-3 Wildcat: 1 destroyed by flak
TBF-1 Avenger: 1 damaged
TBF-1 Avenger: 1 destroyed by flak

Japanese Ships
BB Mutsu

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

CAP engaged:
801 Ku S-1 with A6M2-N Rufe (4 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
4 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 15000.
Raid is overhead
77th Sentai with Ki-43-IIb Oscar (12 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
12 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 15000.
Raid is overhead

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Port Moresby at 98,130

Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid spotted at 19 NM, estimated altitude 12,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 8 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2-N Rufe x 2
Ki-43-IIb Oscar x 7

Allied aircraft
F4F-3 Wildcat x 11
TBF-1 Avenger x 8

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-43-IIb Oscar: 2 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
TBF-1 Avenger: 4 damaged

Japanese Ships
BB Mutsu
DD Hatsuzuki

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

CAP engaged:
801 Ku S-1 with A6M2-N Rufe (2 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
2 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 15000.
Raid is overhead
77th Sentai with Ki-43-IIb Oscar (7 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
7 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 15000 , scrambling fighters between 0 and 15000.
Raid is overhead

(in reply to DanSez)

Post #: 2195

RE: Manila Falls - 9/10/2016 3:51:33 PM

Anachro

Posts: 2506
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline

Luckily, no hits though.

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2196

RE: Manila Falls - 9/28/2016 6:47:48 PM

Lowpe

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

Page 2 shame.

Anyhow I have let a few days slip by with no updates, and with the conclusion of my other game I can focus on this one.

14 Divisions basically stuck in LA. It seems the Allies have decided to march down out of the mountains and attack in the plains and not in LA anymore, so we are attempting our massive escape. It will need amazing luck as not taking San Diego has thrown a huge monkey wrench into my plans to flee LA. But we will hang tough.

The Allies look to be ready to invade either Sumatra or anywhere from Rangoon to the south.

Allies marching out from Port Moresby.

So, I am in a pickle. A big pickle. A really big pickle.

But I am not disheartened, or chagrined. I will fight the Allies with everything I have.

But I have made a mess of Olorin's great opening. Truth hurts.

(in reply to Anachro)

Post #: 2197

RE: Manila Falls - 9/28/2016 7:34:58 PM

Grfin Zeppelin

Posts: 1515
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline

_____________________________

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2198

RE: Manila Falls - 9/29/2016 4:00:04 AM

Capt. Harlock

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

quote:

14 Divisions basically stuck in LA. It seems the Allies have decided to march down out of the mountains and attack in the plains and not in LA anymore, so we are attempting our massive escape. It will need amazing luck as not taking San Diego has thrown a huge monkey wrench into my plans to flee LA. But we will hang tough.

And if nothing else, you've generated one of the most interesting games yet posted.

_____________________________

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 Lowpe)

Post #: 2199

RE: Manila Falls - 9/29/2016 5:33:42 PM

Lowpe

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

Feb 9th, 1943

Looks awfully grim....here.

14 Divisions plus support troops, Allies marching around LA to fight in the clear. San Diego heavily fortified with 3 Allied divisions.

Can you say deathtrap?

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2200

RE: Manila Falls - 9/29/2016 5:53:55 PM

Drakanel

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

I'm not sure I would try to extract them. If you lose other ships, and planes, and pilots...

I don't know, I'm not an expert and I almost don't know the japanese OOB, but... can't you just rebuild those divisions? Because you can't rebuild your CVs and other ships...

< Message edited by Drakanel -- 9/29/2016 11:27:13 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2201

RE: Manila Falls - 9/30/2016 12:37:13 AM

Lokasenna

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

If, on the day of "beachfall" and you're trying to load up... and you can't extract them without getting swarmed by SBDs and TBFs and the like... just leave them. You need your ships more than you need your divisions. They'll almost come back faster if you rebuild them after destruction, too, than if you were to extract about 20 squads and have to rebuild from that because you've got to factor in transit time

.

That said, I do think you should at least try. Leave the naval support squads (assuming you brought them) for last. Pick up your highest-XP divisions first. To that end, I even wouldn't hesitate to drastically underload a TF just to make sure it fully loaded any units I wanted to save in their entirety if I could, while leaving others to die completely.

(in reply to Drakanel)

Post #: 2202

RE: Manila Falls - 9/30/2016 2:40:14 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drakanel

I'm not sure I would try to extract them. If you lose other ships, and planes, and pilots...

I don't know, I'm not an expert and I almost don't know the japanese OOB, but... can't you just rebuild those divisions? Because you can't rebuild your CVs and other ships...

And a reply to Lok.

Lets look at this objectively:

1. 14 Divisions and support troops is a large VP gain.

2. Rebuilding them is a huge supply drain.

Japan can do it once per game, if you have been frugal with supplies and can protect your industry.

3. Buying back all those units is a huge PP drain.

4. A destroyed unit will rebuild faster and get teleported back to Honshu and be ready for usage in 1 month.

5. This game now has morphed into avoiding a 3-1 victory in 1944. DEI oil is very vulnerable now and for probably the next two months. Burma is vulnerable to being cut off.

6. Japan can afford to lose 200 cargo ships attempting an escape.

7. Flying boats cannot air lift portions of expensive PP units to Canada.

8. The Allies can look to merely surround the troops and never attack them - in effect freezing all those units in LA and south. Then I would be short 14 divisions and their support for all of 1943. A very nasty tactic indeed. This was always the peril...the Allies hold down the bulk of Japans unrestricted Army with restricted troops.

For all the above reasons an attempt must be made. Lok is correct.

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 9/30/2016 2:58:14 PM >

(in reply to Drakanel)

Post #: 2203

RE: Manila Falls - 9/30/2016 3:25:03 PM

Lowpe

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

Making progress at Chungking

I might reverse all that progress, as I forgot to take all the units off attack and I am attacking again today. Oops.

Ground combat at Chungking (76,45)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 98210 troops, 1195 guns, 467 vehicles, Assault Value = 2728

Defending force 171991 troops, 581 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 2660

Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 4

Japanese adjusted assault: 1482

Allied adjusted defense: 1421

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 1 (fort level 4)

Japanese Assault reduces fortifications to 4

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

Japanese ground losses:
4974 casualties reported
Squads: 28 destroyed, 538 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 60 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 55 disabled
Guns lost 70 (1 destroyed, 69 disabled)
Vehicles lost 32 (1 destroyed, 31 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
5341 casualties reported
Squads: 108 destroyed, 239 disabled
Non Combat: 136 destroyed, 130 disabled
Engineers: 12 destroyed, 2 disabled
Guns lost 13 (6 destroyed, 7 disabled)
Units destroyed 5

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2204

RE: Manila Falls - 9/30/2016 4:41:06 PM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

1. 14 Divisions and support troops is a large VP gain.

6. Japan can afford to lose 200 cargo ships attempting an escape.

I disagree. 200 xAKs = minimum 1600 VPs plus the lost shipping capability for later. I think you may only have one run at the coast here to get what you want. A second trip would be lucky for you, and you will need to run them up the coast (probably within view of search planes) to your Canadian bases to have any decent shot at being able to do two evacuation trips.

Whatever you do, don't lose your ships. If you really want to save on the PPs for the buying back and just eat the supply bullet, set up a few 1- or 2-ship TFs to pick up a tiny portion of a unit and get out with it. Setting some DDs or APDs to Fast Transport to do this would be the ideal solution as they are less likely to get sunk with the only remaining fragment of the unit onboard.

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2205

RE: Manila Falls - 9/30/2016 6:06:36 PM

Lowpe

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

200 is a lot of ships, but there toast anyway and there is more than enough other cargo ships to see me thru 1944.

Different outlooks...

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 2206

RE: Manila Falls - 9/30/2016 7:34:21 PM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

200 is a lot of ships, but there toast anyway and there is more than enough other cargo ships to see me thru 1944.

Maybe if you're planning to lose Sumatra and Malaysia before then

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2207

RE: Manila Falls - 9/30/2016 7:44:06 PM

jwolf

Posts: 2493
Joined: 12/3/2013
Status: offline

quote:

8. The Allies can look to merely surround the troops and never attack them - in effect freezing all those units in LA and south. Then I would be short 14 divisions and their support for all of 1943. A very nasty tactic indeed. This was always the peril...the Allies hold down the bulk of Japans unrestricted Army with restricted troops.

That would be nasty, but it also seems like a gamey tactic.

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 2208

RE: Manila Falls - 9/30/2016 7:49:27 PM

witpqs

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwolf

quote:

8. The Allies can look to merely surround the troops and never attack them - in effect freezing all those units in LA and south. Then I would be short 14 divisions and their support for all of 1943. A very nasty tactic indeed. This was always the peril...the Allies hold down the bulk of Japans unrestricted Army with restricted troops.

That would be nasty, but it also seems like a gamey tactic.

But besieging them to starve them, bomb them and weaken them (starving for supplies plus attrition, etc.) before attacking to wipe them out is entirely realistic given how strong a force it is.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to jwolf)

Post #: 2209

RE: Manila Falls - 9/30/2016 7:53:13 PM

jwolf

Posts: 2493
Joined: 12/3/2013
Status: offline

Oh sure I agree completely. The US would have to be slow and deliberate about defeating the pocketed Japanese units. It's just the "turn all of S Cal into a POW camp and then sit there" tactic that I would reject.

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 2210

RE: Manila Falls - 9/30/2016 8:24:45 PM

Bullwinkle58

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwolf

Oh sure I agree completely. The US would have to be slow and deliberate about defeating the pocketed Japanese units. It's just the "turn all of S Cal into a POW camp and then sit there" tactic that I would reject.

Japan has the option of attacking unto death.

_____________________________

The Moose

(in reply to jwolf)

Post #: 2211

RE: Manila Falls - 9/30/2016 8:49:25 PM

jwolf

Posts: 2493
Joined: 12/3/2013
Status: offline

quote:

Japan has the option of attacking unto death.

Arrgh, should have thought of that! Fits with the wartime character as well.

(in reply to Bullwinkle58)

Post #: 2212

RE: Manila Falls - 10/1/2016 4:31:26 AM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: jwolf

quote:

Japan has the option of attacking unto death.

Arrgh, should have thought of that! Fits with the wartime character as well.

Until they run out of AV, anyway. But then they'll attrit to death.

(in reply to jwolf)

Post #: 2213

RE: Manila Falls - 10/1/2016 9:44:19 AM

obvert

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

1. 14 Divisions and support troops is a large VP gain.

6. Japan can afford to lose 200 cargo ships attempting an escape.

I disagree. 200 xAKs = minimum 1600 VPs plus the lost shipping capability for later. I think you may only have one run at the coast here to get what you want. A second trip would be lucky for you, and you will need to run them up the coast (probably within view of search planes) to your Canadian bases to have any decent shot at being able to do two evacuation trips.

Whatever you do, don't lose your ships. If you really want to save on the PPs for the buying back and just eat the supply bullet, set up a few 1- or 2-ship TFs to pick up a tiny portion of a unit and get out with it. Setting some DDs or APDs to Fast Transport to do this would be the ideal solution as they are less likely to get sunk with the only remaining fragment of the unit onboard.

I am just catching up, but I tend to agree with this about losing the xAK/xAP. It's not so much the capacity, but the VPs. That's a lot, and there are other factors like the experience gain of ship crews and pilots that do the killing for the Allies that just make them tougher as you go on.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 2214

RE: Manila Falls - 10/1/2016 12:14:55 PM

Olorin

Posts: 1019
Joined: 4/22/2008
From: Greece
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe
8. The Allies can look to merely surround the troops and never attack them - in effect freezing all those units in LA and south. Then I would be short 14 divisions and their support for all of 1943. A very nasty tactic indeed. This was always the peril...the Allies hold down the bulk of Japans unrestricted Army with restricted troops.

You could make a series of shock attacks in the spirit of "BANZAI!" and have them back in Honshu in two months.

_____________________________

"Drang nach Osten"
--A TOAWIII AAR--

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2215

RE: Manila Falls - 10/1/2016 3:44:52 PM

Lowpe

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

Feb 9 1943

Bombing Chungking...they need to do well since I have another deliberate attack coming in with no rest between attacks.

Meanwhile the fleets approach LA area and suffer four or five sub attacks...but they all miss. Will the air attacks follow.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 10/1/2016 3:45:25 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2216

RE: Manila Falls - 10/1/2016 3:51:47 PM

Lowpe

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

I see you!

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2217

RE: Manila Falls - 10/1/2016 3:56:59 PM

Lowpe

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

Unfortunately, one of my fleets moves too close to LA and is savaged by Allied planes. Oops.

The attack at Chungking doesn't do too badly, other than missing to lower forts.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2218

RE: Manila Falls - 10/4/2016 12:35:56 AM

Lowpe

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

Blew a head mainfold gasket on a car the other day, and my brother (of the gamma knife operation a little ways back) had a heart event while he was sleeping.

The monitor caught it, promptly hospitalized, and will get a Pacemaker tomorrow morning.

He has a 3rd degree AV block of a lower heart chamber.

I have the turn, but haven't really started it yet.

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2219

RE: Manila Falls - 10/4/2016 12:47:44 AM

Lokasenna

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

Oh, and here I was going to chastise you for losing good ships I told you not to lose. Now I feel guilty.

Hope your brother pulls through.

As for the car, sounds like a good "you go fix it, son" opportunity. If only...

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 2220