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: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami

 
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: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 4/28/2018 2:08:36 PM   
Falken


Posts: 242
Joined: 8/8/2007
From: ON, Canada
Status: offline 		crsutton,

Hi, since Kitakami and I use the same rule in our game, are you just objecting to the Allies side of rule #6, or are u also saying it doesn't apply to the IJN side as well. I have always thought that the A7M2 or B7A2/3s were too big for IJN CVE? Have I had that wrong since the beginning?

Dave..

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 31
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 4/28/2018 3:42:05 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Falken

crsutton,

Hi, since Kitakami and I use the same rule in our game, are you just objecting to the Allies side of rule #6, or are u also saying it doesn't apply to the IJN side as well. I have always thought that the A7M2 or B7A2/3s were too big for IJN CVE? Have I had that wrong since the beginning?

Dave..


Well, if the idea is to be a bit historical then restricting Japanese aircraft would be the ideal. However, this is a massive fantasy mod and it might be best to just to junk that rule altogether. Frankly as an AFB, I do not think it alters the game or benefits either side one way or another. My choice is to go with as few HRs as possible because they tend to cause more problems than they stop. All in all, this rule set seems fine to me.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Falken)
Post #: 32
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 4/30/2018 1:21:05 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		December 7, 1941

OK. It has been a LONG TIME since I have planned out a December 7th Open. Here is the plan in detail:

CARDIV1
Akagi, Amagi, CVL Ryukaku carry 66 Zero, 54 Val, 69 Kate, and 6 Recon Kate. They are escorted by BC Ishitaka (Amagi-Class), 2 CA, 1 CL, 1 CS, and 7 DD.

CARDIV5
Shokaku, Zuikaku, CVL Karasu carry 66 Zero, 48 Val, 63 Kate, and 6 Recon Kate. They are escorted by CB Fuji and Kita, 2 CA, and 7 DD.

Pearl Harbor Strike:
All Zero on escort. No strafing.
CARDIV1 Vals on Port Strike and CARDIV5 Vals on AF Attack
All Kates on Port Strike

The TF shall strike from the east and then stick around for a 2nd day to do nothing but SWEEP PH and kill American Fighters. The KB will then move ENE to refuel from its AOs.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 33
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 4/30/2018 2:19:31 AM   
Falken


Posts: 242
Joined: 8/8/2007
From: ON, Canada
Status: offline 		Hey John...

You guys doing 2 day turns or 1 day turns? Thought for sure Kitakami would go for 2-day turns, but your note about sweeping on the second day means you might have changed his mind on that.....

Dave...

< Message edited by Falken -- 4/30/2018 2:20:31 AM >

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 34
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 4/30/2018 2:57:52 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		One day turns. Would, EVER contemplate a two day turn. Am too much of a control freak for that!

At least I can admit that...


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Falken)
Post #: 35
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 4/30/2018 4:46:50 AM   
FlyByKnight


Posts: 245
Joined: 10/8/2016
From: West Coast
Status: offline 		Gonna send the KB on a raid along the Southern coast of Australia again?

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 36
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 4/30/2018 11:13:55 AM   
obvert


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

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

One day turns. Would, EVER contemplate a two day turn. Am too much of a control freak for that!

At least I can admit that...



It definitely messes with combined naval/air tactics. I would not like 2 day turns.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

China?

I know it goes against conventional wisdom, but Japan saved tons of supplies by not aggressively pursuing China. He made it to mid 45...

I am not sure that he did bad there. Very hard to quantify...


The way you're thinking of doing China is exactly what I'd do. Come around the bottom and up after letting him think you want to push through the middle and North. You need free troops though, but in this mod I guess you have them.

About India. It's very easy for the Allies to save India by holing up in Bombay and Karachi. You'd have to essentially keep the KB forever patrolling near Karachi to keep troops out, and you can't keep the ones that arrive there from coming.

So ... why not take it first and work your way back?

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 37
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 4/30/2018 2:35:08 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		There are not many added IJA troops within these Mods. The only true difference that has been made is the completion of the Japanese shift from four regiment IDs to three regiment IDs. The Triangular shift is in Leland Ness's Rikugun books and so I went through and completed it. Since these are NAVAL Mods I simply took those extra regiments from nine ID (dropping combat strength correspondingly) and creating three fresh units of decent experience. One starts in China, one in Manchuria, and one is assigned to Southern Army.

For Michael and I this is a major change BUT it does not add combat power to the army just brings little more flexibility in having three more division-sized units.

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 38
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 4/30/2018 2:58:25 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		KB-3 will strike Manila. The Japanese do not know about Adm Hart's decision to move part of the Asiatic Fleet to Cebu so we strike Manila.

KB-3 is comprised of CARDIV2--Hiryu, Soryu, CAVs Takachi and Kushiro, a CB, 2 CS (Chiyoda and Chitose), and 6 DDs. Aircraft complement is 78 Zero, 48 Val, 60 Kate, and 6 Recon Kate.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by John 3rd -- 4/30/2018 3:07:18 PM >

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 39
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 4/30/2018 3:07:00 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Note of new or unknown vessels:

BC Ishitaka is Amagi-Class (5x2 16") and allowed under the changes of the Washington Treaty.

CB Fuji-Class are designed as Cruiser-Killers and begin to be built when the Japanese leave the Treaty System. They mount 2x2 16" guns (taken off of the converted Akagi/Amagi) and three are built with three more building.

CVL Ryukaku-Class--Tonnages are slightly raised for CVs so the Japanese build two CVL that become their proto-CVL class design. Lessons are learned from the failed Ryujo so their is just one hangar deck.

CAV Here is the G.6 class of two ships. The Tokachi and Kushiro carry 3x2 8" Guns and 30 planes. They are allowed in the London Treaty. They are Hybrid ships with very limited ammo and just a few sorties.


Any ship class mentioned here as a Treaty change means that the Allies benefited MORE in the Treaty modifications. The ratio is 10:7 so the Americans AND Brits gain more then the Japanese. You can ask Jorge for specifics. If he doesn't know or answer, I'll happily show...

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 40
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 4/30/2018 3:25:32 PM   
durnedwolf


Posts: 885
Joined: 5/23/2005
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

December 7, 1941

OK. It has been a LONG TIME since I have planned out a December 7th Open. Here is the plan in detail:

CARDIV1
Akagi, Amagi, CVL Ryukaku carry 66 Zero, 54 Val, 69 Kate, and 6 Recon Kate. They are escorted by BC Ishitaka (Amagi-Class), 2 CA, 1 CL, 1 CS, and 7 DD.

CARDIV5
Shokaku, Zuikaku, CVL Karasu carry 66 Zero, 48 Val, 63 Kate, and 6 Recon Kate. They are escorted by CB Fuji and Kita, 2 CA, and 7 DD.

Pearl Harbor Strike:
All Zero on escort. No strafing.
CARDIV1 Vals on Port Strike and CARDIV5 Vals on AF Attack
All Kates on Port Strike

The TF shall strike from the east and then stick around for a 2nd day to do nothing but SWEEP PH and kill American Fighters. The KB will then move ENE to refuel from its AOs.




Hi John,

Sticking around for day 2 just to sweep for enemy fighters... That sounds like a low return for a lot of risk. If Kitakami is aggressive and his airfields are good you might wind up trying to limp some of your carrier force home. The best place to kill aircraft is on the ground - right? Would you consider all DB on airfield attacks for both Day1 and Day2? Plenty of fighters for escort and CAP would be the belt-and-suspenders approach to a day2 attack IMO.



_____________________________


DW

I try to live by two words - tenacity and gratitude. Tenacity gets me where I want to go and gratitude ensures I'm not angry along the way. - Henry Winkler.

The great aim of education is not knowledge but action. - Herbert Spencer

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 41
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 4/30/2018 10:51:05 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		I don't like to attack PH on Day Two due to the flak costs. I'm already starting out with lower quality experience pilots. Don't need to make it worse by senselessly losing them for minimal gain.

This is an important note that the IJN Sea Eagles start with about 150 more planes on the front lines and the 9th Air Fleet in cadre status on Kyushu but starting experience in all IJN Daitai was dropped between 10-15%. It is a serious cost but reflects the hope for a more long-term game.

The Japanese will SWEEP with three ZERO Daitai and rest shall be set for CAP/Naval Strike at seven hexes.


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to durnedwolf)
Post #: 42
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 5/1/2018 5:24:13 PM   
AcePylut


Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline 		IF they are starting out as lower quality pilots, then they're not really as precious as the 80-90 exp pilots you start out with, 'eh? And you can train noob pilots up to the starting exp "faster" since you don't have to go as far... also you may not do as well on the Alpha Strike as you would with 80-90exp pilots.... so why not hit it twice? What's the worse that can happen? You lose 30-40 pilots that can be replaced in a couple of months anyways vs. sinking instead of crippling-and-repaired-later bb's?

How does the VP exchange between 50 pilots/planes vs. 1,2,3,4 old US BB's sunk, not damaged, work for you?

Of course, no plan survives first contact, maybe the 1st days results will require a change in plan either way.

Food for thought from the peanut gallery :)

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 43
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 5/1/2018 10:00:39 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: AcePylut

IF they are starting out as lower quality pilots, then they're not really as precious as the 80-90 exp pilots you start out with, 'eh? And you can train noob pilots up to the starting exp "faster" since you don't have to go as far... also you may not do as well on the Alpha Strike as you would with 80-90exp pilots.... so why not hit it twice? What's the worse that can happen? You lose 30-40 pilots that can be replaced in a couple of months anyways vs. sinking instead of crippling-and-repaired-later bb's?

How does the VP exchange between 50 pilots/planes vs. 1,2,3,4 old US BB's sunk, not damaged, work for you?

Of course, no plan survives first contact, maybe the 1st days results will require a change in plan either way.

Food for thought from the peanut gallery :)


That is some sound logic Sir. Will consider it.


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to AcePylut)
Post #: 44
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 5/1/2018 10:05:45 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Turn ONE is nearly done. Have run it once and am now working on the particulars for SS Patrol Zones, China Orders, etc...

Am going to do something I am very poor at. I am attempting to work my Japanese armies as actual...well...armies. Here are the objectives of the armies of Imperial Japan:

SOUTHERN ARMY
14th Army 3 ID and 2 Brig Luzon/Philippines
15th Army 3 ID Malaya and then Ceylon
16th Army 3 ID and 2 Brig Southern Philippines and Java
25th Army 5 ID and 6 Tank Reg Malaya and India

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 45
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 5/2/2018 11:57:54 AM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		Admiral Cochran has run off to launch his attacks without a more thorough vetting by Naval General staff (me!). So when some delays occur, don't blame your staff John!

< Message edited by ny59giants_MatrixForum -- 5/2/2018 11:58:38 AM >

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 46
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 5/2/2018 12:36:11 PM   
Bearcat2

 

Posts: 577
Joined: 2/14/2004
Status: offline 		Trying to find the scenario you are playing, looked at BtS 5.4, doesn't appear to be the same, are you playing with 6 CV's, 7 CVL's, 3 CVE's at start?



_____________________________

"After eight years as President I have only two regrets: that I have not shot Henry Clay or hanged John C. Calhoun."--1837

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 47
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 5/2/2018 1:19:33 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		This is BTS 5.5. I have to load it on the website as Michael and I were doing touch-ups and fixes until a few days ago.

Japanese OOB:
6 CV
5 CVL
2 CAV
3 CVE

Allied OOB:
3 CV
1 CVL
2 CAV
2 CLV
2 CVE

The General Staff gets its consultation call this morning once Admiral Cochran's minions are at their location of supposed education.


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Bearcat2)
Post #: 48
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 5/2/2018 4:25:29 PM   
Lecivius


Posts: 4845
Joined: 8/5/2007
From: Denver
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

This THREAD IS CLOSED to the Allies and ALL THEIR EVIL SPIES!



Just try to keep me out, you Evil Emperor you!!

_____________________________

If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 49
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 5/2/2018 4:31:27 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 21100
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline 		I'm reading both AARs and loitering and lingering. My sole purpose in life now is to torment John.

(in reply to Lecivius)
Post #: 50
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 5/2/2018 5:20:42 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		How does that differ over the last 10+ YEARS Mister Roper??!!


Lecivius is always welcome! I've heard that you are cute and cuddly...


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 51
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 5/2/2018 5:21:23 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Turn ONE is sent to Guatamala.

Game ON!

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 52
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 5/2/2018 6:08:04 PM   
AcePylut


Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2004
Status: offline 		Wait, what... no BANZAI yet?

That's it, I'm unsubscribing to this thread.



_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 53
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 5/2/2018 6:45:54 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Nothing has occurred YET!

How about I peel one off when I get the turn back prior to running it?


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to AcePylut)
Post #: 54
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 5/2/2018 7:09:56 PM   
anarchyintheuk

 

Posts: 3921
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 55
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 5/2/2018 9:15:17 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Now that he is looking Jorge has found two minor pieces of errata. No matter how many times we go through things there are ALWAYS these little nagging issues.

Think we are OK for moving forward...


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Falken)
Post #: 56
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 5/2/2018 9:24:58 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		Here is the Malaya Plan:

1. Two ID (Imperial Guards and 21st) move by rail and will drive down the West Coast.

2. Three TFs will unite at Kuantan under the protection of Mutsu-Nagato-Tosa. These TFs contain the 55th and 4th ID as well as 6-8 BF and support units.

3. Several BFs and the Army Para unit move to Patani.

The Landing at Kuantan will bring the 4th ID ashore with all the support units. Figuring an easy capture of Kuantan on the 8th, the 55th will then move those few hexes to land the 55th at Mersing. The same day as that occurs, the Paras will drop on Malacca to interdict the RR. If all goes well, these two events will separate the Malaya Army and we should have reasonably easy pickens...

Three ID will be at sea on the way to reinforce the Malay Campaign and will be delivered wherever it is appropriate.




_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Falken)
Post #: 57
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 5/3/2018 11:45:14 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		I have the turn!

Will run it after I get back from an 8th Grade Choir concert.


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 58
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 5/4/2018 4:53:33 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17178
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline 		The bombs have fallen and war is ON!

For the fan base and as per request:

BANZAI!!!




Attachment (1)

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Falken)
Post #: 59
RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami - 5/4/2018 5:07:38 AM   
FlyByKnight


Posts: 245
Joined: 10/8/2016
From: West Coast
Status: offline 		This is going to be a blast.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Typhoon of Steel: John 3rd vs. Kitakami Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   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

0.750