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  109 110 [111] 112 113   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/8/2022 10:46:11 AM   
Lowpe


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

ORIGINAL: T Rav

OK Lowpe, I have to ask... are you old Army or Marine? I've not heard the phrase "range cards" for decades! That was old Army T Rav...



No I wasn't...but surrounded by them. 2 sons currently in Army Reserve, 1 was SF USMA grad so lots and lots of exposure there...and all our parents served. Father in law helped design the main gun turrets on the Iowa class, his Father a welder at the Philly Naval Yard, one Uncle kia at Hurtgen Forest, another dumped into Leyte Gulf when the Princeton went down (he lived), my Father was Air Force.


(in reply to T Rav)
Post #: 3301
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/8/2022 11:17:41 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		The bane of Japan has started arriving: Fletchers! (muh-ha-ha)




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3302
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/8/2022 2:44:16 PM   
BBfanboy


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

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Hmm...






I have seen several of those 0 day upgrades. Must be bolt-ons that can be done in a day. Any plastic surgeon could do it!

Also, AGs don't serve minelayers IIRC, but an AKE/AE should.

Check ahead a few upgrades on Keokuk - she might convert to something later or get an upgrade to a different mine. If there are no other upgrades, she can always be a picket ... or a single mine minesweeper.

_____________________________

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 #: 3303
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/8/2022 3:50:06 PM   
T Rav

 

Posts: 387
Joined: 5/29/2004
Status: offline 		That's a lot of military service for one family!

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 3304
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/8/2022 4:18:22 PM   
Nomad


Posts: 5905
Joined: 9/5/2001
From: West Yellowstone, Montana
Status: offline 		I am not sure what you are trying to get to about the MK-16 mine and the Keokuk mine layers. You will start producing the MK-16 starting December 1942 and produce them throughout the war.
I agree that the build rate is low, but you will get some mines over time.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3305
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/9/2022 1:16:56 AM   
CaptBeefheart


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

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


48. Gameplay Change: Allow ship withdrawals at any on map level-9 port and some
smaller ports with no enemy nearby. Ships can always be withdrawn from any offmap port or from any TF that is currently off map. Ships that are not badly damaged
can be withdrawn from some on-map ports or from TFs in certain on-map regions.
For on map, ship may not be on fire, total damage may not exceed 99 and no
individual damage type (system, floatation, engine) may exceed 50. Ships may not
be withdrawn from any on-map location where the enemy has air superiority. The
intent is to prevent withdrawal as a method of saving a ship that stands a good chance
of being lost or further damaged. On map withdrawal ports are set based on the
historical exit locations for ships leaving the Pacific:

1. Any level 9 port.

2. National home ports of the United States, Canada, India, Australia, and New
Zealand (with no port level requirement)

3. Any level 7 or larger port on the US or Canadian West Coast.

4. Any level 7 or larger Indian port East of Ceylon (including Ceylon itself)

5. Any level 7 or larger port in South Eastern Australia, plus Perth.

6. Any level 7 or larger port in New Zealand.


Thanks for the correction on the "no enemy nearby" rule. I haven't run across such a situation but it certainly could happen. The offmap TF withdrawal is good to know, also. I was going to say Pearl's port usually doesn't go above 8 but I see that's been figured out.

ARs at a zero-level port should work fine to drop the non-major damage.

Cheers,
CB

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3306
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/9/2022 11:08:19 AM   
Lowpe


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

ORIGINAL: Nomad

I am not sure what you are trying to get to about the MK-16 mine and the Keokuk mine layers. You will start producing the MK-16 starting December 1942 and produce them throughout the war.
I agree that the build rate is low, but you will get some mines over time.




My lying eyes! Or my lying brain...I guess I saw 12 there and stopped reading & autocorrected to 12/41!

(in reply to Nomad)
Post #: 3307
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/9/2022 11:10:27 AM   
Lowpe


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

ORIGINAL: T Rav

That's a lot of military service for one family!


I didn't even get in to cousins!

(in reply to T Rav)
Post #: 3308
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/9/2022 11:29:51 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		September 14, 1942

Relentless bombing and tanks and constant attacks have worn down my Ankang area road positions. I have no more fresh troops to allocate up here. Certainly supply is very difficult too.

If Japan were pushing in just one area I would be ok...but with the huge tank army down south China is just too stretched.

China is cracking...tanks.

Ground combat at 81,39 (near Tienshui)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 28406 troops, 299 guns, 240 vehicles, Assault Value = 545

Defending force 16235 troops, 101 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 266

Japanese adjusted assault: 266

Allied adjusted defense: 172

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 1

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

Japanese ground losses:
997 casualties reported
Squads: 6 destroyed, 75 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Vehicles lost 3 (1 destroyed, 2 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
690 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 79 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 7 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 3 disabled

Assaulting units:
6th Ind.Mixed Brigade
19th Tank Regiment
41st Division
36th Division
18th Tank Regiment
2nd Hvy.Artillery Regiment
6th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
12th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3309
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/9/2022 11:31:06 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		A very good air attack...

Morning Air attack on 85th Chinese Corps, at 81,44 , near Ankang

Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid spotted at 17 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 5 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-21-Ic Sally x 20
Ki-21-IIa Sally x 29
Ki-27b Nate x 1
Ki-49-Ia Helen x 30

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21-Ic Sally: 1 damaged
Ki-21-IIa Sally: 2 damaged
Ki-49-Ia Helen: 2 damaged

Allied ground losses:
521 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 31 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 13 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Aircraft Attacking:
20 x Ki-21-Ic Sally bombing from 5000 feet
Ground Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb
29 x Ki-21-IIa Sally bombing from 5000 feet
Ground Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb
30 x Ki-49-Ia Helen bombing from 5000 feet
Ground Attack: 4 x 250 kg GP Bomb

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3310
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/9/2022 11:39:53 AM   
Lowpe


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

will I be able to launch my Tabby invasion prior to the KB showing up? Don't know.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 2/9/2022 11:40:23 AM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3311
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/9/2022 3:05:10 PM   
Lowpe


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

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Also, AGs don't serve minelayers IIRC, but an AKE/AE should.



No tenders work with mines, unless it has been patched somewhere. Port size and naval support only.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 3312
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/9/2022 3:37:14 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		The impact of flying troops in to Lashio, rather than supplies...






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3313
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/9/2022 4:43:09 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Deeper Dive on Lashio....

This is Obvert's fortress Lashio defense, which really starts on Dec 8th. Good terrain, far enough from IJ bases to make fighter interceptions of transports very unlikely. Close enough for a Command HQ to 100% prep...along with a very rare HQc & AA in the area.

The BFF was basically shattered, not surprising as it's TOE is almost all small arms and a handful of mortars and they are rallying one hex behind Lashio.

The 1st Burma is fairly shattered too...with two fractions holding the road northeast of Lashio, while this fraction has good artillery in it.

The Burma Corps HQc gets removed in the next two months sometime, and that will be a potent loss and I need to scrounge around and find a replacement HQc to go along with the Command HQ that is the real force multiplier.



So, the original troops holding have been shattered, but I have managed to fly in two brigades and now the 1/4 of the monster 6th Chinese -- of course sacrificing supplies.

Noticed a neat little trick, the 6th Chinese can hold the base, while the parent unit can draw fresh troops as replacements to be flown in. Chinese troops have much reduced VP levels, and have very deep pools, making this a great tactic. Replaceable cannon fodder.

Of course the Chinese are very poor offensively...but now there is close to 600 AV present, and Japan would need to mount a very large AV force here 1800+ to make a dent.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 2/9/2022 4:46:20 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3314
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/10/2022 12:39:30 AM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9869
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline 		Fletchers you get in '42 have poor night experience, so use them wisely until you can increase it. Love them in various SC TFs, especially with your modern BB/CLs. I use the Bristols in my Air TFs as they have best AA at this point in the war. A group of four for each Air TF.

Have some subs north and west of Truk to monitor and hopefully get lucky with what reinforcements he is probably sending to CenPac.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3315
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/10/2022 12:23:56 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		September 15, 1942

Truk is invested with submarines...watching dl levels on all my pickets....




Attachment (1)

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 3316
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/10/2022 12:25:55 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Iboats have mostly moved out of the Gilberts, and now have set up screens at likely repair bases where search ASW is not possible or at long distances only.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3317
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/10/2022 12:26:44 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		As always, lots of sub action...




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3318
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/10/2022 12:28:02 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Hard hitting!






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3319
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/10/2022 12:30:27 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		More on Lashio...

Japan now up to 1000 AV or so...but troops are bypassing Lashio into the nasty terrain north and east in an attempt to rescue their cut off units...

I have to abandon my Chittagong air operations, as I suspect there is a big bombardment fleet coming....we do have cd guns etc...but they should be here shortly. Will set up some torpedo bombers on night attack.

Forgot to take a picture...

Elsewhere, Japan cap traps the regiment moving to north of Magwe...we lose a fair number of 2E bombers, but they lose a dozen fighters. Not great...but well done, at least my figters did well...

Morning Air attack on 24th Infantry Regiment, at 60,44 , near Shwebo

Weather in hex: Severe storms

Raid spotted at 32 NM, estimated altitude 40,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 7 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 17
A6M5 Zero x 21
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 27
Ki-44-IIa Tojo x 7

Allied aircraft
Hurricane IIb Trop x 15
Hurricane IIc Trop x 10

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 2 destroyed
A6M5 Zero: 4 destroyed
Ki-43-IIa Oscar: 3 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
Hurricane IIb Trop: 1 destroyed
Hurricane IIc Trop: 2 destroyed



< Message edited by Lowpe -- 2/10/2022 12:32:58 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3320
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/10/2022 9:40:27 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		September 16th, 1942

Burma




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3321
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/10/2022 9:42:12 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Most losses over Burma...

Fighter stack at Magwe down to 83 enemy fighters...






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3322
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/10/2022 9:51:07 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Why, hello there! Guests!




40 Enemy fighters at Maloelap

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 2/10/2022 9:52:28 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3323
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/11/2022 1:17:50 AM   
CaptBeefheart


Posts: 2301
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline 		Still no KB. Do you think it could be behind those surface forces? Do you have a secret Cat base to the northwest?

If I could make a suggestion: Yellow lettering on the ocean background (as above) is easier to read than black for me.

Cheers,
CB

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3324
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/13/2022 12:58:57 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Sept 17, 1942

The IJN doesn't rush into the Gilberts, seemingly....maybe they are looking for a combined daytime assault.

Over in the Straits of Malacca big convoys spotted.

My rough calculus is the KB is either at Java refueling or Palembang...hoping they go thru Truk.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3325
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/13/2022 1:11:28 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		No clash around the Gilberts...

Burma

Sweep Japanese fighters performing LRCAP in Burma...knock down 15 for about 5 Hurricanes and 2 Kittyhawks. Our big sweep of Magwe with Lightnings and the bulk of our fighters doesn't fly.

Try a very small attack on the last unit left on the road near Chittagong, but the Japanese don't have a valid retreat path I guess and stay in the hex...I had been hoping to get that sweet pursuit movement bonus.

Ground combat at 56,42 (near Chittagong)

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 2513 troops, 80 guns, 207 vehicles, Assault Value = 1487

Defending force 265 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 2

Allied adjusted assault: 57

Japanese adjusted defense: 1

Allied assault odds: 57 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), leaders(+), fatigue(-), supply(-)
Attacker: shock(+)

Japanese ground losses:
247 casualties reported
Squads: 7 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 8 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Assaulting units:
3rd Carabiniers Regiment
50th Tank Brigade
20th Indian Division
7th Australian Division
6th Australian Division
70th British Division
205th Field Artillery Battalion
2/11th Field Regiment
2/1st Med Regiment

Defending units:
55th Cavalry Regiment




I moved the transport planes out of Chittagong, I am worried about a naval bombardment slipping in by Japan...so that means for 3-4 days no Chinese troops being flown into Lashio. The transports will fly in supplies at a 60% rest level for those days until the Chinese Corp arrives at the new transport base (inland).

My first P40K squadron is repairing...so that will give me 1 Lightning Sqdrn and 1 P40K squadron to attack the Japanese fighters here...in addition to the Hurricanes which still do very well against LRCAP.



Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 2/13/2022 1:14:34 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3326
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/13/2022 1:33:38 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Another big map...just need another few days here.

Big E makes Gardner Island...not much further to Canton or should I stay here and bring the ARs forward?




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 2/13/2022 1:34:38 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3327
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/13/2022 1:38:42 PM   
Lowpe


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

ORIGINAL: CaptBeefheart

Still no KB. Do you think it could be behind those surface forces? Do you have a secret Cat base to the northwest?

If I could make a suggestion: Yellow lettering on the ocean background (as above) is easier to read than black for me.

Cheers,
CB


Just guesses on the KB...refueling in SRA somewhere.

No secret cat bases any further forward...working on it now. Took Ocean Island today.

Thanks for the color comment...nobody has ever said anything I bounced around colors and backgrounds to avoid repetitive colors...I will try my best to replace the black text against blue ocean.


(in reply to CaptBeefheart)
Post #: 3328
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/13/2022 3:34:24 PM   
BBfanboy


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

Lowpe: Big E makes Gardner Island...not much further to Canton or should I stay here and bring the ARs forward?


IIRC, subs can attack disbanded ships a port that is less than 4 in development. I would not park Big E in anything less, unless I could mine the beejeezes out of the port.

_____________________________

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 #: 3329
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 2/13/2022 4:16:37 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		I was expecting some midget sub sightings, raiding the dot bases....didn't happen though.

I don't really recall ever hitting a disbanded ship with sub torpedoes. Bombardments, yes...


(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3330
Page:   <<   < prev  109 110 [111] 112 113   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)) Page: <<   < prev  109 110 [111] 112 113   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

0.672