RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (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: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (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: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

Page: << < prev 100 101 [102] 103 104 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/3/2021 1:34:48 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock

quote:

Baker Island bombarded for the first time, by only two destroyers, but they put in a solid show.

Night Naval bombardment of Baker Island at 149,136

Allied Ships
DD Balch
DD Porter

Those are no ordinary destroyers!

I love all the different destroyers the Allies have...it is a definite advantage over Japan.

(in reply to Capt. Harlock)

Post #: 3031

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/3/2021 1:35:32 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Send for repairs at Colombo to save PP penalties.

That is a court martial offense!

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 3032

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/3/2021 1:36:51 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Send for repairs at Colombo to save PP penalties.

The Japanese hold Columbo - were you meaning CT or were you suggesting it be sent for a quick sinking?
I think Lowpe has time to get her to CT and repair enough of the damage to withdraw her before the due date.

Thanks for the reminder on damage re withdrawing ships. Forgot that.

Yep...Ramillies will try to run to Mombasa and then to Cape Town. Cross your fingers!

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 3033

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/3/2021 1:45:00 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: CaptBeefheart

On the leader ratings, everything I recall from hint sheets and old threads says "aggression" for ground leaders has no effect. Aggression does have an effect on the naval side and possibly on the air side. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

For the admin rating, I've split divisions into A, B and C and have clearly seen how leaders with higher admin un-disable devices more quickly, as expected. My guess is admin rating doesn't affect device upgrades.

Good luck with the Ramillies. I'm not sure what else you could do other than a suicide run.

Cheers,
CB

I don't really give any credence to the old leader charts...rather, I use the definitions of the values and think could it apply...so I do a lot of crazy things like selecting high naval skills on a dive bomber squadron commander for example.

It is probably totally a waste of PPs, but it really increases my enjoyment of the game and gives me some tidbits to throw out in the AAR.

(in reply to CaptBeefheart)

Post #: 3034

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/3/2021 1:46:49 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

...I was always curious if the admin rating of the leaders had any effect on upgrades in that unit, my play experience tells me that if they do it is very minimal in the range of a few percentage points....

The short answer is no re Admin rating. That rating does have an indirect impact on device recovery which in turn impacts on what gets returned to the pools when upgrading.

Alfred

Thanks Alfred...

(in reply to Alfred)

Post #: 3035

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/5/2021 8:26:46 AM

CaptBeefheart

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

quote:

ORIGINAL: CaptBeefheart

On the leader ratings, everything I recall from hint sheets and old threads says "aggression" for ground leaders has no effect. Aggression does have an effect on the naval side and possibly on the air side. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

For the admin rating, I've split divisions into A, B and C and have clearly seen how leaders with higher admin un-disable devices more quickly, as expected. My guess is admin rating doesn't affect device upgrades.

Good luck with the Ramillies. I'm not sure what else you could do other than a suicide run.

Cheers,
CB

I don't really give any credence to the old leader charts...rather, I use the definitions of the values and think could it apply...so I do a lot of crazy things like selecting high naval skills on a dive bomber squadron commander for example.

It is probably totally a waste of PPs, but it really increases my enjoyment of the game and gives me some tidbits to throw out in the AAR.

Ah, giving the game a role playing flavor. That's cool.

Cheers,
CB

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3036

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/6/2021 2:28:19 PM

Lowpe

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

July 20, 1942

China is certainly hanging on, if barely. Supplies, supplies, supplies.

I need to look and see how what the HQ supply drain is....I could perhaps move extra HQ units into the wild where they wouldn't draw supplies or something else.

Wonderful game inside a game the developers have created here.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to CaptBeefheart)

Post #: 3037

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/6/2021 3:35:22 PM

witpqs

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

They would still draw supply unless they were WAY into the wild, just that more supply would be lost to movement friction. But moving them might reduce over stacking penalties where there are any.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3038

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/6/2021 5:41:40 PM

RangerJoe

Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline

I wonder if moving them closer to India will help bring supplies from there. Even with a high wastage rate, it might help. That should probably have been done at the start of the game to help bring more supplies in from/through Burma.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

�Illegitemus non carborundum est (�Don�t let the bastards grind you down�).�
― Julia Child

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 3039

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/6/2021 8:05:17 PM

Alfred

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

...I need to look and see how what the HQ supply drain is....I could perhaps move extra HQ units into the wild where they wouldn't draw supplies or something else...

No, that won't accomplish anything.

All HQs are not created equal when it comes to attracting the hidden extra supply demand.

In practice only a Command HQ will attract the extra supply demand. Then only if located at a base assigned to it. They have zilch effect if located outside of a base.

China starts off with only a single Command HQ, which is static, hence not mobile. Not till 1943 do any further Command HQs arrive in theatre, and they don't have any bases assigned to them. All the Chinese Corps HQs have the standard LCU supply demand, which in their case is not that much anyway. As a LCU, those Corps HQs, if located out in the field, will be fed supply from any relevant base whereas if located at a base they are fed only from that base's supply depot.

Bringing into China non Chinese LCUs simply exacerbates the existing structural supply difficulties. Expecting those units to both take replacements and upgrade devices adds to the supply difficulties.

Alfred

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3040

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/6/2021 8:29:58 PM

RangerJoe

Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline

Thank you, Alfred.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

�Illegitemus non carborundum est (�Don�t let the bastards grind you down�).�
― Julia Child

(in reply to Alfred)

Post #: 3041

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/7/2021 3:00:52 PM

Lowpe

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

July 21, 1942

Switching over to destroyers for the heavy lifting now on the Baker Island thrust...going to move North Carolina to nail something else I think or simply to perform shakedown cruises.

In other news, almost all of our slow battleships are fully upgraded for the date, and also have finished their shakedown cruises and have max experience so they might be employed. However, I really fear putting them to use now, knowing how powerful they can be in late 43 and 44 with so much more support.

For the naval invasion bombardment support, I haven't decided what my bombardment task forces will look like yet or even the timing. I feel good just building the dot bases and bypassing for now rather than pulling the trigger and putting at risk a lot assets.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3042

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/7/2021 3:05:49 PM

Lowpe

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

Note the good combat value, the lack of a supply malus...got to be discouraging for Japan.

Ground combat at 81,41 (near Ankang)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 17006 troops, 141 guns, 464 vehicles, Assault Value = 627

Defending force 30406 troops, 69 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1012

Japanese adjusted assault: 501

Allied adjusted defense: 2539

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 5

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

Japanese ground losses:
241 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 22 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 16 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Vehicles lost 75 (2 destroyed, 73 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
547 casualties reported
Squads: 6 destroyed, 38 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Assaulting units:
9th Tank Regiment
15th Tank Regiment
23rd Tank Regiment
3rd Tank Regiment
15th Division
13th Tank Regiment
11th Tank Regiment
51st Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion

Defending units:
35th Chinese Corps
9th Chinese Corps
57th Chinese Corps

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3043

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/7/2021 3:25:06 PM

ny59giants

Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline

quote:

For the naval invasion bombardment support, I haven't decided what my bombardment task forces will look like yet or even the timing.

I tend to put those old, slow BBs in the Amphib TF to fire while unloading as it usually takes many phases to do so and they soak up any CD or FA gun hits in '42 and '43 before you get APA/AKAs. Since you will probably have to place those precious few APs to use, placing the old BBs nearby makes sense to me. Make sure you have a LCU with Naval Support for each invasion.

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3044

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/7/2021 4:34:16 PM

mind_messing

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

July 21, 1942

Switching over to destroyers for the heavy lifting now on the Baker Island thrust...going to move North Carolina to nail something else I think or simply to perform shakedown cruises.

In other news, almost all of our slow battleships are fully upgraded for the date, and also have finished their shakedown cruises and have max experience so they might be employed. However, I really fear putting them to use now, knowing how powerful they can be in late 43 and 44 with so much more support.

For the naval invasion bombardment support, I haven't decided what my bombardment task forces will look like yet or even the timing. I feel good just building the dot bases and bypassing for now rather than pulling the trigger and putting at risk a lot assets.

I would urge some caution, as the battleships are a challenging asset to manage at this point in the game given how they guzzle fuel, and even more so given the need to depend on tenders this far from a major port.

I think they need to be able to make a bombardment run and get back under friendly CAP before the air phase, elsewise it's a field day for the Betty/Nell.

That said, you should be alright for this corner of the map, at least for Canton and Baker, as it's probably far too far for any IJ land based air to fly.

Far better to stick with the destroyers and cruisers that you can use more regularly and more economically for the day-to-day work, from a practical standpoint.

I've had some success by simply plastering bases using a whole load of destroyers, which has the advantage of being a quick run in and out as well as fairly easy on the logistics train.

I've had issues with battleships soaking the supply and OPS points from AKE's/smaller ports and making rearming other ships a real bottleneck, which is exactly what you don't want when you're running a campaign from a small port and a load of tenders.

Leaning on the destroyers also gives you the option of leaning of the AD class ships a lot more - there's quite a few of them so you can take a few more risks with them than you would with other ships and inch forward your power projection that way...

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3045

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/11/2021 8:45:31 PM

Lowpe

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

July 22, 1942

A good fight on a road in China...

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3046

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/11/2021 11:05:56 PM

RangerJoe

Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline

You have good roadblocks, now if you can just keep the supplies flowing . . .

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

�Illegitemus non carborundum est (�Don�t let the bastards grind you down�).�
― Julia Child

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3047

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/15/2021 1:44:22 PM

Lowpe

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

July 24, 1942

China...we are leaking a bit...but holding. The big hit will be another armored push up from the Canton area with full armored divisions I bet.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3048

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/15/2021 2:07:49 PM

Lowpe

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

Baker and Canton and Gilberts

Japan has unique units that can make bypassed bases dangerous...like Rufes, flying boats, type 88 mines and Iboats.

Our three launching bases have at least gotten to level 1 ports and now we can begin unloading bulldozers...Malden & Fanning. Christmas is almost fully built out.

Overall I am working at understanding the capabilities of Allied shipping to get the units to the front and working.

We are using all destroyers to keep up the bombardments, and yesterdays on Baker showed Nells so Japan is flying Nells for search out of a size 1 runway...something I wouldn't do but it does give him good search and is less expensive than flying boats.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 11/15/2021 2:08:58 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3049

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/15/2021 2:20:45 PM

Lowpe

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

We are getting enough supply up here for the troops, but not enough to get the bases past 20. I could fly some in to help with runway building, but haven't yet as all the good transports go to India. I could start using bombers, the Hudsons and probably will.

This is slow burner advance. I haven't really spent a lot of time optimizing here.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3050

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/15/2021 2:23:14 PM

Lowpe

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

A long way to Kal...

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3051

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/15/2021 2:25:14 PM

Lowpe

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

Flood damage was over 60 yesterday...came down a bit today. Hard to see this ship making it all the way to Mombasa...but we will try.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3052

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/15/2021 2:49:14 PM

Lowpe

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

Definite backwater area currently given Japan's lack of grabbing bases...will start our push here following my overall strategy of pushing along the entire Japanese perimeter but with the hammer blow coming at Marcus and Marianas.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3053

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/15/2021 5:23:07 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

We are getting enough supply up here for the troops, but not enough to get the bases past 20. I could fly some in to help with runway building, but haven't yet as all the good transports go to India. I could start using bombers, the Hudsons and probably will.

This is slow burner advance. I haven't really spent a lot of time optimizing here.

Anecdotally, I found that when I brought in a convoy of supply to Port Augusta and set the supply spinners at Oodnadata or Alice Springs to max draw, at least part of the supply went on the direct rail line to those bases. The supply ships came via Cape Town.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3054

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/15/2021 5:25:26 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Flood damage was over 60 yesterday...came down a bit today. Hard to see this ship making it all the way to Mombasa...but we will try.

Allied damage control and an experienced crew - I give it at least 60% chance it will make it.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3055

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/17/2021 1:18:57 PM

Lowpe

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

July 25th, 1942

Naval clash near Baker Island in the Pacific...

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3056

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/17/2021 1:23:10 PM

Lowpe

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

China...starting to crack.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3057

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/17/2021 1:42:29 PM

Lowpe

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Anecdotally, I found that when I brought in a convoy of supply to Port Augusta and set the supply spinners at Oodnadata or Alice Springs to max draw, at least part of the supply went on the direct rail line to those bases. The supply ships came via Cape Town.

No problem getting supply to Alice Springs just can't get enough north as priority is the troops in the field. I will start flying some up today.

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 3058

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/21/2021 12:47:04 PM

Lowpe

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

July 26th, 1942

The Chinese lines are buckling, no supply, but our troops can still move and in an absolutely shocking maneuver manage at the very last minute to reinforce our line against two IJA division and save the day...and for now prevent a breakout.

Not shown in this picture is all the small guerilla units moving all around the IJA frontal lines, infiltrating...therein lies the longer term possibility of holding this line.

Additionally, wearing down and disrupting the IJA divisions in this inhospitable terrain, means a long time before they are combat ready again...

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3059

RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 11/21/2021 1:02:37 PM

witpqs

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

Good job! Pnce they clear a road for supply onto the plain there it's much more difficult to slow them down.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Lowpe)

Post #: 3060

Page: << < prev 100 101 [102] 103 104 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))