RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

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: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

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] >> World in Flames >> After Action Report >> RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR

Page: << < prev 95 96 [97] 98 99 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/14/2017 8:47:42 PM

ashkpa

Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline

no problem.

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2881

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/15/2017 6:28:16 PM

rkr1958

Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

Turn 23. May/June 1943. Allied #2. Post Land Movement. USSR. Northern Front.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2882

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/15/2017 6:29:05 PM

rkr1958

Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

Turn 23. May/June 1943. Allied #2. Post Land Movement. USSR. Central/Moscow Front.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2883

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/15/2017 6:30:04 PM

rkr1958

Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

Turn 23. May/June 1943. Allied #2. Post Land Movement. USSR. Southern Front (Georgia & Caucuses).

Looking desperate ...

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2884

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/15/2017 6:36:56 PM

rkr1958

Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

Turn 23. May/June 1943. Allied #2. USSR. Land Combat. Luftwaffe Ground Support?

Desperate times call for desperate actions. In this case Timoshenko commits his HQ and all reserve troops tied to HQ to a desperate attack to attempt to save the situation in Georgia and the Caucuses.

Do you wish to fly ground support?

Also, do want the attack be an assault or a blitz?

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by rkr1958 -- 10/15/2017 6:47:16 PM >

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2885

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/15/2017 7:52:54 PM

ashkpa

Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline

quote:

Turn 23. May/June 1943. Allied #2. USSR. Land Combat. Luftwaffe Ground Support?

Desperate times call for desperate actions. In this case Timoshenko commits his HQ and all reserve troops tied to HQ to a desperate attack to attempt to save the situation in Georgia and the Caucuses.

Do you wish to fly ground support?

Also, do want the attack be an assault or a blitz?

Yes fly the f-b as a bomber and support the defenders. Make it a blitz.

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2886

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/15/2017 7:59:43 PM

Zecke

Posts: 1330
Joined: 1/15/2005
From: Hitoeton
Status: offline

WOW.WOW..WOWWWWW�..almost..all objetives done...pleasure of AARs

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2887

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/15/2017 8:22:09 PM

rkr1958

Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zecke

WOW.WOW..WOWWWWW�..almost..all objetives done...pleasure of AARs

Thanks for following! Now for resolution of the Soviet desperate and critical land combat.

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to Zecke)

Post #: 2888

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/15/2017 8:33:22 PM

rkr1958

Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ashkpa

quote:

Turn 23. May/June 1943. Allied #2. USSR. Land Combat. Luftwaffe Ground Support?

Desperate times call for desperate actions. In this case Timoshenko commits his HQ and all reserve troops tied to HQ to a desperate attack to attempt to save the situation in Georgia and the Caucuses.

Do you wish to fly ground support?

Also, do want the attack be an assault or a blitz?

Yes fly the f-b as a bomber and support the defenders. Make it a blitz.

A bloodless result ... Timoshenko chooses not to advance.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by rkr1958 -- 10/15/2017 8:34:38 PM >

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2889

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/15/2017 8:52:02 PM

rkr1958

Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

Turn 23. May/June 1943. Allied #2. US HQ Reorg.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2890

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/15/2017 8:55:11 PM

rkr1958

Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

Turn 23. May/June 1943. Allied #2. CW Naval Reorg.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2891

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/15/2017 8:58:30 PM

rkr1958

Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

Turn 23. May/June 1943. Axis #3. Weather.

Nice weather for Pat to continue beating up on the allies.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2892

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/26/2017 1:09:47 AM

ashkpa

Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline

MA43 i3:
Axis Actions: GE land, JP combine, IT combine
Italy moves a BB to the 0-box of the E. Med.
JP flies a NAV to the China Sea (3-box) and 2x FIG and NAV to the Bismark Sea (4-box).
The Japanese move majority of the fleet in Truk to the Mariannas
Truk subs are scattered across 4 zones, but ordered to avoid all combat during this impulse.

Here are the possible combats. Many I am not initiating as shown in image below. One search result shown (Arabian Sea - no contact).

Attachment (1)

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2893

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/26/2017 1:10:55 AM

ashkpa

Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline

In the E. Med, the allies find on rolls of 8/2. Surprise will depend on box taken. I expect you will likely avoid combat here.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2894

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/26/2017 1:11:42 AM

ashkpa

Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline

You have potential reactions in the Bismarck Sea as shown below.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2895

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/26/2017 1:12:30 AM

ashkpa

Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline

You also have potential reactions in the Mariannas as shown.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2896

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/26/2017 2:23:43 AM

rkr1958

Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

1. East Med. Pick 0-box. Use 4 SP's to avoid combat.

2. Bismarck Sea. US P-40c Tomahawk on Papua [126,177] and CW Beafout NAV react to the 2-box.

3. The Marianas. No reactions.

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2897

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/26/2017 4:15:44 AM

ashkpa

Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline

MA43 i3 Naval Combat:
Bismarck Sea search rolls of 6/10 result in no contact.
In the Marinanna there is contact on rolls of 2/7. I really debated between naval air and making it a surface. Decided on the naval air, then later realized it was raining, halving the A-S factors results. May have changed my mind, but to late now the bombers are flying.
I am only engaging the 3-box. You need to decide how to fly your CVP as fighters or bombers. My decisions made (grayed range units are flying as bombers).

Attachment (1)

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2898

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/26/2017 12:59:41 PM

rkr1958

Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

Fighters: SBD-5 (Saratoga), F6F-3 (Essex), SBD (Bunker Hill)

Bombers: TBF-4 (Yorktown II), SBD-3 (Essex)

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2899

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/26/2017 8:05:17 PM

ashkpa

Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline

Ok, I used 4 SP to move A-A up 1 for me and down 1 for you. First A-A roll is 15, you can choose to abort front fighter or bomber? Do you have directions for future results?

Attachment (1)

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2900

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/26/2017 10:50:57 PM

rkr1958

Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

Sorry, forgot. In the air-to-air target the bombers if possible. So, abort the bomber.

US CVP units will stay until the status of all bombers are resolved.

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2901

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/27/2017 5:35:11 AM

ashkpa

Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline

Here is the result of the A-A combat, it went 5 rounds. First two rounds were exactly symmetric rolls. You took my lead bomber out and I took your lead fighter out. Both cleared the best bomber. After that it got more ugly for the US, though another Japanese bomber was aborted.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2902

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/27/2017 5:36:15 AM

ashkpa

Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline

AA results favored the US, when a JP bomber was destroyed (the lowest A-S factor)

Attachment (1)

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2903

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/27/2017 5:38:59 AM

ashkpa

Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline

Finally apply the damage. First up comes the Japanese who do X 2D 2A. First X on the Essex, which makes it's saving throw.
US get to decide on the first D and the first A.

On the other side, I believe the Axis will get a D A result against their ships. The US gets to place the first A. I don't have a good image (need to go back to earlier posts), since I cannot save at this point.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2904

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/27/2017 9:52:59 PM

rkr1958

Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

USN will apply D to CA Chicago. Then A to any damaged CV first, damaged CA next and CA Houston after that.

Apply A to 3 or 4 capacity carrier with highest air to sea factors on board.

The USN will NOT stay for a round 2. Abort/damaged ships all go back to Pearl.

< Message edited by rkr1958 -- 10/27/2017 9:54:00 PM >

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2905

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/27/2017 10:44:47 PM

ashkpa

Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline

quote:

USN will apply D to CA Chicago. Then A to any damaged CV first, damaged CA next and CA Houston after that.

Apply A to 3 or 4 capacity carrier with highest air to sea factors on board.

The USN will NOT stay for a round 2. Abort/damaged ships all go back to Pearl.

Assume you meant to apply the D against Japan with the same directions. In Naval-Air combat the "attacker" chooses the first result.

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2906

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/27/2017 11:27:12 PM

rkr1958

Posts: 23483
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ashkpa

quote:

USN will apply D to CA Chicago. Then A to any damaged CV first, damaged CA next and CA Houston after that.

Apply A to 3 or 4 capacity carrier with highest air to sea factors on board.

The USN will NOT stay for a round 2. Abort/damaged ships all go back to Pearl.

Assume you meant to apply the D against Japan with the same directions. In Naval-Air combat the "attacker" chooses the first result.

Yes, that.

_____________________________

Ronnie

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2907

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/28/2017 4:06:32 AM

ashkpa

Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline

So, the rest of the damage. Good early rolls for the US limited the damage, but in the end the Essex was sunk. The Japanese carrier targeted was aborted (passed it's damage roll).

Attachment (1)

(in reply to rkr1958)

Post #: 2908

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/28/2017 4:18:58 AM

ashkpa

Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline

{edit - forgot to mention the air planes aborted to Kwajalein}

On the abort back to Pearl, the US ships had to make it through sub infested waters. The first group (the ships that took aborts during the combat) were not sighted on a roll of 3. Needed at 2 to find them in rain. The second group of ships were found on a roll of 1. The allies then rolled a 7 (it may have been a 6) resulting in 8 SP for the Japanese, with only the aborting ships fighting through from the 0-box involved. Japan used 4 SP to choose a surface battle. The JP used 3 of the last 4 surprise points to select the ship to take the D and choose the Bunker Hill. It was surprised and damaged in the attack. The allies then inflicted severe damage on the subs (damage) and aborted them from the zone.

Note, I was surprised when the program then asked me to land the carrier planes, though it did not let me change which carriers they were on (I think). I did not know that carrier planes were flown during a surface battle and always have played in f-t-f games that they stayed on the same carriers they started on.

In the end, I believe the JP lost 1 CVP to AA. The allies lost the Essex with 1 CVP, 1 CVP shot down during air-air combat, and another CV damaged. Net gain for the axis, but I spent more oil that I really need to save.

This finished the naval combat phase and the allies had no options of initiating any further combat.

{Second edit. Note, I never committed your subs or my subs to the combat, yours are still in the Mariannas}

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by ashkpa -- 10/28/2017 4:31:19 AM >

(in reply to ashkpa)

Post #: 2909

RE: Pat vs Ronnie GW AAR - 10/28/2017 7:20:02 PM

ashkpa

Posts: 1507
Joined: 1/16/2014
Status: offline

MA43 Ground Strikes: Two, Stalingrad with ART and SE of Moscow with a tank buster. You have two planes (circled) that can intercept and I have 3 that can counter intercept (all visible in the image).