RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A)

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: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A)

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A)

Page: << < prev 28 29 [30] 31 32 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 5/29/2016 4:24:13 PM

SqzMyLemon

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

I found the 66th Corps. From the Central Reserve at Chungking. Oh well. It appears I'll be facing other massive Chinese Corps in a few areas. I'll just have to be more careful and not take any further unnecessary risks in China.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

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

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 871

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 5/29/2016 4:37:42 PM

FeurerKrieg

Posts: 3397
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Denver, CO
Status: offline

I haven't tried the 1/3 first and the rest later. I've generally stayed with moving the whole stack across the river. Sometimes I'm surprised and I win the combat outright, saving me a turn. And even when I have high disruption it rarely takes me more than 3-5 days to lose it from the whole stack.

_____________________________

Upper portion used with permission of www.subart.net, copyright John Meeks

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 872

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 5/29/2016 4:48:23 PM

SqzMyLemon

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Feurer Krieg

I haven't tried the 1/3 first and the rest later. I've generally stayed with moving the whole stack across the river. Sometimes I'm surprised and I win the combat outright, saving me a turn. And even when I have high disruption it rarely takes me more than 3-5 days to lose it from the whole stack.

I forgot to post a screen shot showing the AV involved. I've added it to the original AAR above.

The biggest factor was the poor recon. At only three enemy LCU's being shown with less than 40k of troops, I didn't expect to run into 1400 AV. More along the lines of 1000 maybe. Hard to say what would have happened had I attacked with my entire force, which included armour. I could just have easily had my entire force decimated. A steep price to pay, but the 66th Corps was a nasty surprise and the low numbers from my recon fooled me into thinking I was dealing with a smaller force. Still, to have one of my best divisions get wiped out is a bitter pill to swallow. I expect experience and leadership to count for something in this game, but if you fail your rolls this kind of thing happens.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 5/29/2016 4:51:10 PM >

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

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

(in reply to FeurerKrieg)

Post #: 873

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 5/29/2016 4:57:11 PM

SqzMyLemon

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

A couple of CHI units start as frags that can be built up. If he puts supply to it, he can get it up to 720 squads of INF ... a good leader and he will have at least 45 exp by this time .... That all ties to what his modifiers were.

You had a disruption modifier and low supply on your unit .... pushing too hard? Lack of supply on attack is always a huge malus ... that is likely where your ZERO adjusted AV came from. ouch.

One thing though that you don't account for Pax. The Japanese unit was 76 exp, the leader one of the best in the Japanese army. It's clear to me that I failed every roll in this combat. There's no way I should have suffered an adjusted AV of 0 considering the situation. That disruption came from some failed roll. This was a 1 in a 100 outcome in my opinion, coupled with bad recon that led to a bad decision to continue the crossing.

Again, I'm not complaining. This isn't the first time I've gotten my ass handed to me in land combat. Considering the defence, this attack had a low probability of success, but the rolls certainly made it the worst outcome possible. Some better rolls and I'd still have come out on the short end, but perhaps not completely wiped out.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 5/29/2016 5:28:39 PM >

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

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

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 874

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 5/29/2016 5:21:52 PM

SqzMyLemon

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

You had a disruption modifier and low supply on your unit .... pushing too hard? Lack of supply on attack is always a huge malus ... that is likely where your ZERO adjusted AV came from. ouch.

This is starting to bug me (not your post Pax, but the modifiers for both sides) so I went back to the situation just before the attack to provide all the details on my side. I was never short of supply. I was wrong there and it was support lacking, but that isn't rare in this game. Here is the exact condition of the IJA 104th Division just prior to the assault. Tell me I didn't fail every roll in this one? And where does the (-) supply modifier come from if I have a 60% unit surplus?

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 5/29/2016 5:33:38 PM >

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

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

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 875

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 5/29/2016 5:27:31 PM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

You had a disruption modifier and low supply on your unit .... pushing too hard? Lack of supply on attack is always a huge malus ... that is likely where your ZERO adjusted AV came from. ouch.

This is starting to bug me, so I went back to the situation just before the attack. I was never short of supply, I was wrong there, it was support lacking, but that is common. Here is the exact condition of the IJA 104th division just prior to the assault. Tell me I didn't fail every roll in this one?

They had 1593 supplies - did they get bombed or anything prior, to make them use up some on AA?

I'm also wondering if any of the pre-attack bombardment phase stuff actually subtracts the supply used from the unit's stockpile prior to the assault value/odds being calculated. On a shock attack, doesn't the bombardment stuff happen twice? Also, the 1593 supply they had is more than they need at rest (952, presumably), but almost certainly less than their requirement when in combat. Nothing you can really do about that, but if a lot of supply got burned in the pre-assault bombardment(s), then perhaps that's where that came from. What were their supplies after the battle?

The disruption penalty happens just because of it being a forced shock attack, so seeing the (-) for that is not at all uncommon.

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 876

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 5/29/2016 5:37:44 PM

SqzMyLemon

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

You had a disruption modifier and low supply on your unit .... pushing too hard? Lack of supply on attack is always a huge malus ... that is likely where your ZERO adjusted AV came from. ouch.

This is starting to bug me, so I went back to the situation just before the attack. I was never short of supply, I was wrong there, it was support lacking, but that is common. Here is the exact condition of the IJA 104th division just prior to the assault. Tell me I didn't fail every roll in this one?

They had 1593 supplies - did they get bombed or anything prior, to make them use up some on AA?

I'm also wondering if any of the pre-attack bombardment phase stuff actually subtracts the supply used from the unit's stockpile prior to the assault value/odds being calculated. On a shock attack, doesn't the bombardment stuff happen twice? Also, the 1593 supply they had is more than they need at rest (952, presumably), but almost certainly less than their requirement when in combat. Nothing you can really do about that, but if a lot of supply got burned in the pre-assault bombardment(s), then perhaps that's where that came from. What were their supplies after the battle?

The disruption penalty happens just because of it being a forced shock attack, so seeing the (-) for that is not at all uncommon.

They were not bombed so that was the supply available. If that's the case regarding the supply, well that is completely out of my control. If the land combat routine used up all my supply then that is 100% bad luck and I couldn't have done anything differently to change it. Like I said, I think this was a 1 in a 100 result and it went against me this time.

I agree on the disruption and shouldn't have said it was a bad roll. You always suffer disruption conducting a river crossing.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 5/29/2016 5:56:40 PM >

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

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

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 877

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 5/29/2016 5:44:39 PM

SqzMyLemon

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

Here's the unit immediately following the attack.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 5/29/2016 5:59:48 PM >

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

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

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 878

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 5/29/2016 5:49:54 PM

SqzMyLemon

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I'm also wondering if any of the pre-attack bombardment phase stuff actually subtracts the supply used from the unit's stockpile prior to the assault value/odds being calculated. On a shock attack, doesn't the bombardment stuff happen twice? Also, the 1593 supply they had is more than they need at rest (952, presumably), but almost certainly less than their requirement when in combat. Nothing you can really do about that, but if a lot of supply got burned in the pre-assault bombardment(s), then perhaps that's where that came from. What were their supplies after the battle?

If what you say about the supply is true, then that is BS. Since the player has no control over the amount of supply in a unit, the fact that the AI doesn't ensure enough supply is provided to a force about to make a river crossing assault is completely unfair. Thinking on this further, it also doesn't make sense that the artillery should be able to use up the supply for the non-artillery components of the unit. Those 1600 supply units were for the whole division, not just the artillery component. If the arty used up all the division's supply, that's not right.

The result of this combat is what it is. I just faced too strong of a defence and for whatever reason my force was severely handicapped even further by under the hood game mechanics, that I have ZERO control over.

Now I'm complaining.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 5/29/2016 6:28:19 PM >

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

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

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 879

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 5/29/2016 11:21:33 PM

SqzMyLemon

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

Ok, I need to move on and forget about this. I think the combat model needs its pound of flesh during river crossings, and because I only sent one unit against a strong defence it has to get wiped out. That's how it works and disputing the result is a waste of time. I don't agree it should work that way, but who am I to question it.

Anyway, the real reason I posted is I confirmed my earlier question about upgrading R&D factories. I just had a Tojo IIa factory fully repair at 1x30. It is still greyed out, so I switched it to the IIb model and it switched with no damage. If you wait until the text turns blue, you've waited too long to switch for free. I really don't have the patience to remember every little detail to this game anymore, and it explains why I'm playing so badly and getting frustrated all the time.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

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

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 880

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 5/30/2016 1:28:27 AM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I'm also wondering if any of the pre-attack bombardment phase stuff actually subtracts the supply used from the unit's stockpile prior to the assault value/odds being calculated. On a shock attack, doesn't the bombardment stuff happen twice? Also, the 1593 supply they had is more than they need at rest (952, presumably), but almost certainly less than their requirement when in combat. Nothing you can really do about that, but if a lot of supply got burned in the pre-assault bombardment(s), then perhaps that's where that came from. What were their supplies after the battle?

If what you say about the supply is true, then that is BS. Since the player has no control over the amount of supply in a unit, the fact that the AI doesn't ensure enough supply is provided to a force about to make a river crossing assault is completely unfair. Thinking on this further, it also doesn't make sense that the artillery should be able to use up the supply for the non-artillery components of the unit. Those 1600 supply units were for the whole division, not just the artillery component. If the arty used up all the division's supply, that's not right.

The result of this combat is what it is. I just faced too strong of a defence and for whatever reason my force was severely handicapped even further by under the hood game mechanics, that I have ZERO control over.

Now I'm complaining.

Yes, I follow you here. It's what makes shock attacks so risky when you're not sitting on a pile of supply, because as you say the player has no control over how much supply his units get.

I'm just guessing on why you might have had the supply penalty. You definitely weren't out of supply, but if the unit didn't have as much as needed (looks like not, considering it has 910 and in such a shattered state requires 902) then you'll see the (-) there. I think Alfred has said that after 10 "shots" (which could have been hit in this combat), the unit's supply requirement hits 100% of its resting requirement and that is the max it can go to. In this case, that would be about 1900 supply. However, that is not the supply required for a single attack. There's a lot going on under the hood here that we really don't know about, such as the exact threshold of supplies on hand to supplies required that triggers the supply(-).

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Ok, I need to move on and forget about this. I think the combat model needs its pound of flesh during river crossings, and because I only sent one unit against a strong defence it has to get wiped out. That's how it works and disputing the result is a waste of time. I don't agree it should work that way, but who am I to question it.

Anyway, the real reason I posted is I confirmed my earlier question about upgrading R&D factories. I just had a Tojo IIa factory fully repair at 1x30. It is still greyed out, so I switched it to the IIb model and it switched with no damage. If you wait until the text turns blue, you've waited too long to switch for free. I really don't have the patience to remember every little detail to this game anymore, and it explains why I'm playing so badly and getting frustrated all the time.

Yep RE: the aircraft factories. You can move it right along to the Tojo-IIc right now, actually. If you wanted to. Make a backup save file before doing so and then try it.

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 881

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 5/30/2016 1:44:16 AM

PaxMondo

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I'm also wondering if any of the pre-attack bombardment phase stuff actually subtracts the supply used from the unit's stockpile prior to the assault value/odds being calculated. On a shock attack, doesn't the bombardment stuff happen twice? Also, the 1593 supply they had is more than they need at rest (952, presumably), but almost certainly less than their requirement when in combat. Nothing you can really do about that, but if a lot of supply got burned in the pre-assault bombardment(s), then perhaps that's where that came from. What were their supplies after the battle?

If what you say about the supply is true, then that is BS. Since the player has no control over the amount of supply in a unit, the fact that the AI doesn't ensure enough supply is provided to a force about to make a river crossing assault is completely unfair. Thinking on this further, it also doesn't make sense that the artillery should be able to use up the supply for the non-artillery components of the unit. Those 1600 supply units were for the whole division, not just the artillery component. If the arty used up all the division's supply, that's not right.

The result of this combat is what it is. I just faced too strong of a defence and for whatever reason my force was severely handicapped even further by under the hood game mechanics, that I have ZERO control over.

Now I'm complaining.

Yes, I follow you here. It's what makes shock attacks so risky when you're not sitting on a pile of supply, because as you say the player has no control over how much supply his units get.

I'm just guessing on why you might have had the supply penalty. You definitely weren't out of supply, but if the unit didn't have as much as needed (looks like not, considering it has 910 and in such a shattered state requires 902) then you'll see the (-) there. I think Alfred has said that after 10 "shots" (which could have been hit in this combat), the unit's supply requirement hits 100% of its resting requirement and that is the max it can go to. In this case, that would be about 1900 supply. However, that is not the supply required for a single attack. There's a lot going on under the hood here that we really don't know about, such as the exact threshold of supplies on hand to supplies required that triggers the supply(-).

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Ok, I need to move on and forget about this. I think the combat model needs its pound of flesh during river crossings, and because I only sent one unit against a strong defence it has to get wiped out. That's how it works and disputing the result is a waste of time. I don't agree it should work that way, but who am I to question it.

Anyway, the real reason I posted is I confirmed my earlier question about upgrading R&D factories. I just had a Tojo IIa factory fully repair at 1x30. It is still greyed out, so I switched it to the IIb model and it switched with no damage. If you wait until the text turns blue, you've waited too long to switch for free. I really don't have the patience to remember every little detail to this game anymore, and it explains why I'm playing so badly and getting frustrated all the time.

Yep RE: the aircraft factories. You can move it right along to the Tojo-IIc right now, actually. If you wanted to. Make a backup save file before doing so and then try it.

+1
It would really depend upon how much supply was in the hex. 952 is required when the unit is NOT fighting ... so in combat, figure a LOT more. The 0AV modified is clearly from the lack of supply ... that's the only time I have ever seen that. AS noted above, its what makes any river crossing so dangerous.
You don't have control of non-base hex supply so it is risky. Having said that, I've had this happen to me countless times.

I know better, but still get caught on it.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 882

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 5/30/2016 2:28:15 AM

SqzMyLemon

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

Thanks Lok and Pax. If that is truly what happens during river shock attacks, I will change my tactic of sometimes using a single unit first. I know I've had success in the past doing so, but this is the first time I've seen every combat squad in a division destroyed on top of the high disruption. The result it extremely unfair in my opinion, but this whole game relies on extremes during combat.

I don't like it or agree with it, but that's how the game works. If a base can now stockpile supply, a unit should be able to as well. A player is conditioned to know that attacking with a red supply level is bad, but when white you should be ok. Now you have to worry about whether your at rest supply will be enough for combat operations? Give me a break.

The only good result out of this mess is I get to buy out a division for only 404 PP's.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 5/30/2016 2:40:57 AM >

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

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

(in reply to PaxMondo)

Post #: 883

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 5/30/2016 8:48:03 AM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Thanks Lok and Pax. If that is truly what happens during river shock attacks, I will change my tactic of sometimes using a single unit first. I know I've had success in the past doing so, but this is the first time I've seen every combat squad in a division destroyed on top of the high disruption. The result it extremely unfair in my opinion, but this whole game relies on extremes during combat.

I don't like it or agree with it, but that's how the game works. If a base can now stockpile supply, a unit should be able to as well. A player is conditioned to know that attacking with a red supply level is bad, but when white you should be ok. Now you have to worry about whether your at rest supply will be enough for combat operations? Give me a break.

The only good result out of this mess is I get to buy out a division for only 404 PP's.

I think you had what you could call a "cascade failure" that resulted in the 0 AV. It wasn't just supply. I've seen 0 adjusted AV from extremely high disruption and fatigue before, but plenty of supplies.

I recommend you drop the practice of leading with a single unit first also. Full stack or nothing is best, especially against Chinese.

As for the supply matter itself and player conditioning... well, now you know, and what do they say about knowing?

Lastly, just because supplies are in the red doesn't mean you would suffer an AV penalty for supplies, or at least it doesn't mean you would meet the threshold for the (-). A specific circumstance where this might apply is if your unit has 1200 supplies and requires 900 at rest, and then you conduct an attack. Now your unit wants 1500 supplies, and you're down to 1000. Well, your deliberate attack just used 200 supplies (not 1500), and you still have 1000 left... so you should have a pretty good idea that you can attack at least one more time without suffering (too much or at all) from a lack of supplies.

In this case, the shock attack mechanics are almost certainly what burned you on the supplies, not the increased supply requirement mechanic itself.

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 884

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 5/30/2016 9:39:52 PM

SqzMyLemon

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

I'll change tactics. Thanks for all the information. I think losing every infantry squad in the division was BS, but it's not worth disputing anymore. The game is such an abstraction that trying to understand how it works at times is just an exercise in futility.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

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

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 885

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 5/30/2016 9:49:54 PM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

I'll change tactics. Thanks for all the information. I think losing every infantry squad in the division was BS, but it's not worth disputing anymore. The game is such an abstraction that trying to understand how it works at times is just an exercise in futility.

Well, you already found the silver lining!

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 886

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 5/31/2016 3:56:04 PM

SqzMyLemon

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

Well, you already found the silver lining!

That's true.

The next turn is off. Plan B to flank around to Kweiyang is underway. It will take almost a month. I just have to be patient and keep moving forward. Eventually the lack of Chinese supply will be the deciding factor in China.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 6/3/2016 6:05:03 PM >

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

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

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 887

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 6/3/2016 6:08:27 PM

SqzMyLemon

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

I've mentioned this before, but I'm playing my worst game ever as Japan.

The pace has slowed again somewhat. I'm frustrated with my situation and needing to take more time to complete my turns it seems.

I'll try and post some screens this weekend, but that also requires effort. It's becoming harder to want to document my ineptness.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 6/3/2016 6:11:19 PM >

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

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

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 888

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 6/6/2016 6:48:43 PM

SqzMyLemon

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

We've reached April 20/42:

I've been finding it hard to update this AAR of late, or at least in a way to do it justice. Here's a brief synopsis of recent events.

Burma:

Japanese forces have captured Pegu and just recently Toungoo. I am repositioning the three Japanese divisions in the theatre for an assault on Rangoon. It appears there are only seven enemy LCU's at the base now, down from 10 just the other day. I'm attempting to block the rail line north of Rangoon to prevent the remaining Allied troops from withdrawing. A small Allied blocking force is awaiting my arrival. The three divisions I'm committing to taking Rangoon should be enough to take the base. Forts may be high, but against the reduced garrison I don't expect too much trouble.

Another Allied force is still at Moulein. I've invested the base from the southeast with Thai divisions and artillery, but not enough to take the base. Once Rangoon falls I'll deal with Moulmein.

Java:

The invasion of Java is finally about to begin. I've massed my invasion forces at Balikpapan and they will set sail tomorrow. The plan is to land at Semarang and spilt the island in two. Soerabaja is the first obejective, then deal with Batavia. I've assigned three divisions to his invasion with a fourth in reserve.

Luzon:

I've massed three divisions at Takao, and will load up the amphibious taskforces and set sail in a few days. I've begun redeploying fighters to the area to limit ship losses against the remaining Allied air forces still in the theatre. The biggest threat are the PBY's in a naval attack role. There's a weak point in Francois defence and I'll be landing behind the bulk of his forward defence to march on Clark Field quickly.

Darwin:

I should have invaded when I had the chance. It's clear the Allies are planning on denying the base to my control, or at least make me pay a steep price in taking it. Francois is expanding the airbase and clearly has been reinforcing and resupplying the base. I will mount a full invasion as soon as Java is under control. The first 4E raid based out of Darwin occurred on the 19th. Not good and this threat needs to be snuffed out pronto.

China:

Lots of action here with both Allied and Japanese air forces trading successes in the air. My southern push is stalled as I shift through the nasty terrain. My movement against Yenan is paying dividends as it appears Chinese forces are withdrawing. I first have to clear a Chinese roadblock in the 3x defensive terrain east of the river on the road to Yenan. I'm hoping a lack of supply for the Chinese will make it not such a rough undertaking as it would be otherwise. We'll see, but I need to break through here to start applying more pressure on Francois' Chinese defence.

The Solomons:

The Allies are probing my non-existent defences here. I expect something big soon, but I need to get cracking to offer some form of resistance here.

Thoughts:

I'll feel better once I'm on Java and Luzon in strength. I don't expect quick campaigns, but I think I can grind away and get these areas under control in a timely fashion. Darwin is going to be a bear to deal with now, but I'll worry about that later. The priority is get the DEI wrapped up.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 6/6/2016 6:52:19 PM >

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

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

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 889

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 7/19/2016 6:18:59 PM

SqzMyLemon

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

May 15/42:

It's been a long time since I've updated. Keeping both my games going at a decent pace, while providing a decent AAR for both, has proven difficult.

So what's been happening?

Burma:

Rangoon has been captured. Commonwealth forces still hold Moulmein, but Japanese forces are currently attacking the base.

China:

Yenan has been captured. Japanese forces are about to assault Langchow by river crossing. I'm hoping the 100% prep will reduce losses. Japanese forces are about to grind it out northwest of Tuyun in 3x terrain to flank the Chinese river position and move on Kweiyang. It's taken a long time to get the artillery and armour in place.

Java:

Soerabaja has been captured. Japanese forces now begin the long march to Batavia.

Timor:

Koepang and Dili have been captured. Recent events have led to an interesting development on the last turn. I'd had KB parked at Makassar getting daily search hits from Allied naval search for over a week. Two large Japanese transport task forces were unloading at Koepang and Dili, both of which were spotted by Allied naval air search. With Darwin still Allied, and noticing recent enemy transport activity along the Australian coast, I sent KB heading towards Koepang on a whim. Unexpectedly, KB hit pay dirt. An Allied battleship taskforce was being sent to Koepang to bombard my position, or attack the unloading taskforce. Instead, it came up short and found KB. An afternoon naval air strike was launched from KB, finding four British battleships, a heavy cruiser and two destroyers. Unfortunately, the AI launched only half of KB's aircraft in an afternoon strike, but all four enemy battleships and the heavy cruiser were hit. Three battleships took torpedo and bomb hits, while the remaining battleship and heavy cruiser suffered bomb hits only. One battleship is severely damaged with four torpedo hits, another took two. I'll take the results, but it could have been much better had the AI included a full strike, or at least a better strike package. Kate's from Akagi had no torpedoes and struck with bombs, while both Shokaku and Zuikaku had full torpedo capability, but launched no strikes. Still, I get lucky and finally get some solid hits against an enemy surface taskforce committed too forward with no air cover.

The enemy TF is four hexes southwest of Koepang and has three options as I see it. First, damn the torpedoes and move northeast to try and intercept KB. The other two options are flee southwest towards Broome, or southeast towards Darwin. I've detached some small SCTF's to try and catch the British during the night phase to use up some ops points. I've also ordered a strong SCTF of four CA's and six DD's to try for an intercept. KB will position itself midway between both escape options and might get a chance for an attack during the air phases. Koepang is torpedo capable, so I've moved in some Nell's and Zero's set to a range of eight hexes to avoid enemy CAP at Broome or Darwin. It all comes down to the enemy TF's orders. Will it make a clean getaway, or end up within air range during the day? I'm not sure if there are enemy aircraft carriers close, but I don't rule it out either. I'm not optimistic I'll catch the British, because I've not been successful catching enemy naval forces for a second day of combat to date. However, it could be another eventful day.

The Philippines:

Clark Field has just been captured on 15 May. The main Allied defence is at Manila though. I'll move against Bataan, open up the straights and bring in the navy to pound Manila. I have four divisions on Luzon.

Australia:

I've just been kicked out of Cooktown. Soon my Australian adventure will be over. I need to wrap a few things up quickly and get reinforcements into New Guinea and the Solomons.

Thoughts:

I've recovered my mojo somewhat and moving forward all over the map. I'm still kicking myself for blowing the first 3 months of the war. I really let a golden opportunity to apply an enormous amount of pressure to the Allies early in this one slip away, but my position is improving every day.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 8/3/2016 6:01:17 PM >

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

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

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 890

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 7/19/2016 6:51:40 PM

SqzMyLemon

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

A brief note on R&D and production.

Both Ha-45 and Ha-43 engines are advancing nicely at one month every 20 and 25 days, respectively.

After my initial industry expansion supply drain, the Home Islands have recovered to almost 1.4 million stockpiled. I'm currently banking between 11-15k per day. I've not had to send any supply to China. The perimeter is self-sufficient for the moment, and needs are met by shuttling existing supply stockpiles to where it's needed.

Oil is dropping quickly, but I haven't made an effort to ship it to the Home Islands. Fuel is holding it's own. I'm getting the tankers in place and will begin the heavy lifting shortly to get the Home Island stockpiles growing. I've been concerned with Batavia still being in Dutch hands, and that my LOC from Palembang isn't fully secure to risk the big tankers. Resources are holding steady, but I'm not able to increase the stockpile in the Home Islands yet.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

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

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 891

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 7/20/2016 2:41:25 AM

SqzMyLemon

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

May 16/42:

A good turn.

CA Kako finds two of the British BB's with 0% moonlight. She takes a nasty 15" shell hit that causes a massive explosion for her troubles. The CA is disbanded at Koepang with 40 Sys and 42 Flt damage. Ouch. AAR follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Roti at 66,117, Range 9,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
CA Kako, Shell hits 4
DD Makigumo
DD Asashio
DD Arare

Allied Ships
BB Revenge, Shell hits 5, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
BB Resolution, Shell hits 6
DD Norman, Shell hits 1, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Tjerk Hiddes

Reduced sighting due to 0% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Clear Conditions and 0% moonlight: 9,000 yards
Range closes to 21,000 yards...
Range closes to 19,000 yards...
Range closes to 17,000 yards...
Range closes to 15,000 yards...
Range closes to 13,000 yards...
Range closes to 11,000 yards...
Range closes to 10,000 yards...
Range closes to 9,000 yards...
CONTACT: Japanese lookouts spot Allied task force at 9,000 yards
CONTACT: Allied lookouts spot Japanese task force at 9,000 yards

A bit of a scare follows, but combat is avoided. AAR follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Roti at 66,118, Range 23,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
CV Hiryu
CV Soryu
CV Shokaku
CV Zuikaku
CV Akagi
BB Hiei
CA Tone
CA Chikuma
DD Kagero
DD Shiranui
DD Kasumi
DD Shikinami
DD Ayanami
DD Asagiri
DD Sagiri
DD Yugiri

Allied Ships
BB Royal Sovereign
BB Ramillies
CA Dorsetshire
DD Balch
DD Nestor

Reduced sighting due to 0% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Clear Conditions and 0% moonlight: 9,000 yards
Range increases to 23,000 yards...
Range increases to 23,000 yards...
Both Task Forces evade combat

In the air phase, the enemy TF's are within range of both KB and the Nell's based at Koepang. The Nell's finally redeem themselves after proving useless for nearly six months of the war. AAR's follow:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Derby at 66,122

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid detected at 32 NM, estimated altitude 15,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 12 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 29
G3M2 Nell x 33

Japanese aircraft losses
G3M2 Nell: 4 damaged
G3M2 Nell: 1 destroyed by flak

Allied Ships
BB Royal Sovereign, Torpedo hits 5, and is sunk
BB Ramillies, Torpedo hits 3, heavy damage
CA Dorsetshire

Aircraft Attacking:
33 x G3M2 Nell launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Derby at 66,122

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid detected at 48 NM, estimated altitude 16,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 17 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 36
B5N2 Kate x 22
D3A1 Val x 18

Japanese aircraft losses
B5N2 Kate: 1 damaged
D3A1 Val: 4 damaged
D3A1 Val: 1 destroyed by flak

Allied Ships
CA Dorsetshire, Bomb hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
BB Ramillies, Bomb hits 7, Torpedo hits 4, and is sunk
DD Balch
DD Nestor

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x D3A1 Val releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
13 x B5N2 Kate bombing from 9000 feet
Naval Attack: 2 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
5 x D3A1 Val releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
9 x B5N2 Kate launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp
4 x D3A1 Val releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
4 x D3A1 Val releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg SAP Bomb

Heavy smoke from fires obscuring CA Dorsetshire

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Derby at 66,122

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 35 NM, estimated altitude 19,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 13 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 29
G3M2 Nell x 30

Japanese aircraft losses
G3M2 Nell: 1 damaged

Allied Ships
CA Dorsetshire, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
DD Balch
DD Nestor

Aircraft Attacking:
30 x G3M2 Nell launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 45cm Type 91 Torp

And KB goes MIA in the afternoon. Three battleships within range and she launches a total of 40 bombers? KB traditionally underperforms in my games and it's sad to watch. Not that this wasn't a great tactical victory, but frankly the whole enemy force was ripe for destruction.

Now, like Nimitz, I want that fourth BB and the CA. The question is do I risk getting near Broome and the Allied LBA to do so. The Japanese fighters are heavily fatigued and may not be up to providing a strong CAP.

I finally catch and hit an Allied surface TF with Nell's. That alone made my day. KB contributed, but still underperforms due to poor strike allocations by the AI, in my opinion. Regardless, scratch three British battleships from the OOB. They are probably the ones due to withdraw anyway, but I don't care. They're a much needed boost to my morale.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 7/20/2016 3:29:52 PM >

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

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

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 892

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 7/20/2016 3:01:18 AM

FeurerKrieg

Posts: 3397
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Denver, CO
Status: offline

That is a beautiful sight to see! British ships going down to Japanese torpedoes! Nice work!

_____________________________

Upper portion used with permission of www.subart.net, copyright John Meeks

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 893

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 7/20/2016 3:29:48 PM

SqzMyLemon

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

It was a fun turn to watch for sure. In all the years I've played AE as Japan, an outcome like this has been few and far between. I'm always been left feeling disappointed at the results when there's a chance for a major naval victory, but in this case, I'm quite happy.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

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

(in reply to FeurerKrieg)

Post #: 894

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 7/20/2016 3:34:34 PM

SqzMyLemon

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

I'm still working on the next turn, but have decided to withdraw KB. I want to rest my fighter pilots and I need to replenish a large number of float planes for the surface combat ships. I'd like to transition KB into the Central Pacific, so I'd like to pull a vanishing trick here if possible.

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

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

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 895

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 7/21/2016 1:55:15 PM

Bif1961

Posts: 2014
Joined: 6/26/2008
From: Phenix City, Alabama
Status: offline

Carrier air coordination for the Japanese anytime is affected if there is more than 200+ AC in one CV TF. This may explain some of the issues with the later performance of the KB since you had all 5 of your CVs in one TF for a total of approximately 360 AC. I am sure on the 1st day when you intercepted the British BB TF you had divided into two or more TFs to improve the odds of coordinated strike packages. What was the weather like?

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 896

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 7/21/2016 6:07:08 PM

Lokasenna

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bif1961

Carrier air coordination for the Japanese anytime is affected if there is more than 200+ AC in one CV TF. This may explain some of the issues with the later performance of the KB since you had all 5 of your CVs in one TF for a total of approximately 360 AC. I am sure on the 1st day when you intercepted the British BB TF you had divided into two or more TFs to improve the odds of coordinated strike packages. What was the weather like?

I think DL is a more likely culprit. If the lack of coordination had hit, the strike would've just been fragmented. Instead, what probably happened is the TF CO or air units COs decided not to launch more planes than they did, which can be the result of low aggression, low morale, or low DL.

(in reply to Bif1961)

Post #: 897

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 7/21/2016 6:41:58 PM

SqzMyLemon

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

Could be any number of things, but this isn't the first time strikes from KB have me shaking my head. I remember way back in my PBEM versus smeulders KB launching a strike at PT Boats at Ndeni and ignoring large surface and transport taskforces at Lunga. I'm happy with the results over the last two days. The four torpedo hits by Kate's on day two though was simply picking off a dead in the water hulk thanks to the Nell's.

KB has always performed poorly in my experience. I've also noticed I almost never get two air phases worth of strikes from KB. Maybe my expectations for KB are too high. Regardless, it was a good one-two punch this time from KB and LBA. I'm not complaining, just mentioning some observances.

I did check the air group leaders though and the torpedo component of Shokaku has a 41 aggression leader, he's gone when I return to port. That explains why one group didn't fly. All the others look to have suitably aggressive leaders.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 7/21/2016 6:53:36 PM >

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

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

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 898

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 7/21/2016 6:58:14 PM

SqzMyLemon

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

The turn has already been sent, but I did order Japanese forces to withdraw except for a small destroyer force. My hope is with 7% moonlight they might catch the lone BB or heavily damaged CA during the night.

I want to replenish KB and the surface ships. KB could also use some time in port to deal with some damage that's accumulated over the last few months.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 7/21/2016 7:01:00 PM >

_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

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

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 899

RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A) - 7/21/2016 8:27:19 PM

Lokasenna

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

CVs rarely launch both an AM and a PM strike.

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)

Post #: 900

Page: << < prev 28 29 [30] 31 32 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Insert witty AAR title here - Sqz(J) vs. fcharton (A)