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  78 79 [80] 81 82   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/28/2021 4:47:03 PM   
RangerJoe


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

ORIGINAL: castor troy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


Are the Devastators set to torpedo or bomb? If they are set to torpedo with none available they might carry four 500 lb bombs. Or are they attacking at 5 hex range?

Since the Vindicators are not dive bombing, you might want to lower their altitude.


The Vindicators are there for intel gathering, rather than making hits.

We will see if the Devastators carrying more ammo...although I am happy with double 500#.






They will carry 2x500lb bombs instead of a torpedo


I have seen them carry four 500 lb bombs. They dropped them on the enemy as well.

_____________________________

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 castor troy)
Post #: 2371
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/28/2021 9:57:37 PM   
Lowpe


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

Resolution goes to guard Triv, which I feel will be bombarded tonight, or passed by as IJN raiders want to reach Cochin...not happy with the number of destroyer escorts, would feel better with five or more...but we have to do it so that Ramillies can put out her small fire and perhaps make Calicut.

Battle last 16 rounds and the long lances start screaming in from 10k and they seem to keep coming all night, until near the end of the engagement Resolution gets hit by one.

Resolution was a champ, shrugging off 20cm hits...

Sure enough the IJN bombard, they task force shouldn't have had this much ammo left, as it was also attacked 2-3 times by Swordfish prior to the bombardment but forts only 1:

Night Naval bombardment of Trivandrum at 27,43

Allied aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft losses
Hurricane IIb Trop: 2 damaged
Hurricane IIa Trop: 1 damaged
P-39D Airacobra: 5 damaged

Japanese Ships
CA Chokai
CL Naka

Allied Ships
BB Resolution, Shell hits 1, heavy damage

Allied ground losses:
236 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 13 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 5 disabled
Guns lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled)

Airbase hits 2
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 8
Port hits 4

E8N2 Dave acting as spotter for CA Chokai
CA Chokai firing at Trivandrum
CL Naka firing at Trivandrum




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 6/28/2021 9:59:32 PM >

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 2372
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/28/2021 10:04:54 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		23 miles marched on our exit from Rockhampton, but now some units have 15% disruption!

Can we get out before the attack? BB SAG up at Townsville, with about 8 CMs.

Night Naval bombardment of Rockhampton at 95,152

Japanese Ships
CA Aoba
CA Mikuma
CA Mogami
DD Minekaze
DD Yayoi
DD Mutsuki
DD Arashi

Allied ground losses:
374 casualties reported
Squads: 4 destroyed, 18 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 40 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 23 (1 destroyed, 22 disabled)
Vehicles lost 20 (4 destroyed, 16 disabled)

CA Aoba firing at 21/22 Field Regiment
E8N2 Dave acting as spotter for CA Mikuma
CA Mikuma firing at 41st Infantry/A Division
E8N2 Dave acting as spotter for CA Mogami
CA Mogami firing at 41st Infantry/B Division
DD Minekaze firing at 13th Australian Brigade
DD Yayoi firing at 182nd Infantry Regiment
DD Mutsuki firing at 13th Australian Brigade
DD Arashi firing at 41st Infantry/A Division






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 6/28/2021 10:05:18 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2373
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/28/2021 10:12:47 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		This is for NY59Giants....

Some big guns to reduce Bundaberg...




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2374
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/28/2021 10:21:17 PM   
ny59giants


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

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2375
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/28/2021 10:27:55 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Ceylon front...

Good hits on the repair shipyard at Colombo, but I inadvertently send a beast squadron in during the daylight, and we lose a beast. We did sweep prior but with only 1 Hurricane squadron.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 2376
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/28/2021 10:30:48 PM   
RangerJoe


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

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Ceylon front...

Good hits on the repair shipyard at Colombo, but I inadvertently send a beast squadron in during the daylight, and we lose a beast. We did sweep prior but with only 1 Hurricane squadron.







You might need to recapture that shipyard sooner than later . . .

_____________________________

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 #: 2377
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/28/2021 11:04:13 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3393
Joined: 10/28/2013
Status: offline 		Glad it's just not me that struggles to get good mileage out of the R class. I sometimes wonder if the R in "R class" stands for "Right into torpedoes" as that's pretty much all I've seen them do in my experience.


Any port will do for the Ramillies atm. I wouldn't risk moving it myself, especially with that one hex speed limit.

IJ 250kg bombs will bounce off the deck armour, so all you need to worry about is 800kgs from the Betty/Nell/Kate or a naval bombardment (which looks fairly risky at this point). III Indian Corp flak should be enough to make any bombing a costly opposition, to say nothing of CAP

Just need to dodge torpedoes for a turn or two!

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 2378
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/29/2021 1:28:26 AM   
Lowpe


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

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Glad it's just not me that struggles to get good mileage out of the R class. I sometimes wonder if the R in "R class" stands for "Right into torpedoes" as that's pretty much all I've seen them do in my experience.


Any port will do for the Ramillies atm. I wouldn't risk moving it myself, especially with that one hex speed limit.

IJ 250kg bombs will bounce off the deck armour, so all you need to worry about is 800kgs from the Betty/Nell/Kate or a naval bombardment (which looks fairly risky at this point). III Indian Corp flak should be enough to make any bombing a costly opposition, to say nothing of CAP

Just need to dodge torpedoes for a turn or two!



Not nearly enough escorts for the R class...I had sent several American destroyers over, but a lot of them have already paid the ultimate price or are upgrading for radar.

However, I was very disappointed to see the actual shells fired which was very few despite being heavily targeted by the Japanese, and plenty of burning IJN ships for her to fire at. Fired almost 0 6" shells for example.

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 2379
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/29/2021 1:35:26 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Turn is away, and the armored cars are shock attacking at Bowen...I think they might get naval bombarded and end up shocking to their destruction, but we shall see. It is a crapshoot...


(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 2380
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/29/2021 1:36:10 AM   
RangerJoe


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

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Glad it's just not me that struggles to get good mileage out of the R class. I sometimes wonder if the R in "R class" stands for "Right into torpedoes" as that's pretty much all I've seen them do in my experience.


Any port will do for the Ramillies atm. I wouldn't risk moving it myself, especially with that one hex speed limit.

IJ 250kg bombs will bounce off the deck armour, so all you need to worry about is 800kgs from the Betty/Nell/Kate or a naval bombardment (which looks fairly risky at this point). III Indian Corp flak should be enough to make any bombing a costly opposition, to say nothing of CAP

Just need to dodge torpedoes for a turn or two!



Not nearly enough escorts for the R class...I had sent several American destroyers over, but a lot of them have already paid the ultimate price or are upgrading for radar.

However, I was very disappointed to see the actual shells fired which was very few despite being heavily targeted by the Japanese, and plenty of burning IJN ships for her to fire at. Fired almost 0 6" shells for example.


Then it appears that the ship was either rushing towards or running away from the enemy since those only fire to the side.

_____________________________

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 #: 2381
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/29/2021 1:55:46 AM   
BBfanboy


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

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Glad it's just not me that struggles to get good mileage out of the R class. I sometimes wonder if the R in "R class" stands for "Right into torpedoes" as that's pretty much all I've seen them do in my experience.


Any port will do for the Ramillies atm. I wouldn't risk moving it myself, especially with that one hex speed limit.

IJ 250kg bombs will bounce off the deck armour, so all you need to worry about is 800kgs from the Betty/Nell/Kate or a naval bombardment (which looks fairly risky at this point). III Indian Corp flak should be enough to make any bombing a costly opposition, to say nothing of CAP

Just need to dodge torpedoes for a turn or two!



Not nearly enough escorts for the R class...I had sent several American destroyers over, but a lot of them have already paid the ultimate price or are upgrading for radar.

However, I was very disappointed to see the actual shells fired which was very few despite being heavily targeted by the Japanese, and plenty of burning IJN ships for her to fire at. Fired almost 0 6" shells for example.


Then it appears that the ship was either rushing towards or running away from the enemy since those only fire to the side.

We don't know how the game is modeling positions and tactics so we can only surmise. My take on it is that after an initial salvo or two, BBs tend to be left behind while the DDs and sometimes cruisers rush between the two TFs. BBs would be out of position and unable to fire for fear of hitting their own ships - as the "check fire" order in the Battle of Cape Esperance illustrated (one DD got between the US cruisers and the enemy column).

In virtually every gun battle featuring one or more BBs, the BB hardly fires unless it is long range (20K yards or more) or an enemy ship is greatly slowed and the BB is passing it as it chases the faster ships. I have not had a chance for the Iowa class BBs with their excellent speed to duke it out with enemy ships. If my theory is right, they should be in the battle constantly, not just at beginning and end.

_____________________________

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 RangerJoe)
Post #: 2382
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/29/2021 2:06:56 AM   
Lowpe


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

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Glad it's just not me that struggles to get good mileage out of the R class. I sometimes wonder if the R in "R class" stands for "Right into torpedoes" as that's pretty much all I've seen them do in my experience.


Any port will do for the Ramillies atm. I wouldn't risk moving it myself, especially with that one hex speed limit.

IJ 250kg bombs will bounce off the deck armour, so all you need to worry about is 800kgs from the Betty/Nell/Kate or a naval bombardment (which looks fairly risky at this point). III Indian Corp flak should be enough to make any bombing a costly opposition, to say nothing of CAP

Just need to dodge torpedoes for a turn or two!



Not nearly enough escorts for the R class...I had sent several American destroyers over, but a lot of them have already paid the ultimate price or are upgrading for radar.

However, I was very disappointed to see the actual shells fired which was very few despite being heavily targeted by the Japanese, and plenty of burning IJN ships for her to fire at. Fired almost 0 6" shells for example.


Then it appears that the ship was either rushing towards or running away from the enemy since those only fire to the side.

We don't know how the game is modeling positions and tactics so we can only surmise. My take on it is that after an initial salvo or two, BBs tend to be left behind while the DDs and sometimes cruisers rush between the two TFs. BBs would be out of position and unable to fire for fear of hitting their own ships - as the "check fire" order in the Battle of Cape Esperance illustrated (one DD got between the US cruisers and the enemy column).

In virtually every gun battle featuring one or more BBs, the BB hardly fires unless it is long range (20K yards or more) or an enemy ship is greatly slowed and the BB is passing it as it chases the faster ships. I have not had a chance for the Iowa class BBs with their excellent speed to duke it out with enemy ships. If my theory is right, they should be in the battle constantly, not just at beginning and end.


Interesting theory. But I don't think that lives us up to my anecdotal information. Normally, my BBs fire a lot, but then again they almost always have nothing but destroyer escorts and at least 5 of them...The R class simply don't have that many turrets, and she did fire all her rear turret main gun ammo. I should have looked at the distribution of the destroyers ammo consumption.

I always shudder when I get the infamous "crossing the T" blurb, as it seems the defenders fire more....



(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 2383
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/29/2021 10:37:22 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		April 26, 1942

A relatively quiet day, Manila falls however, and most of the troops surrender rather than retreat.

Night time bombing of Colombo ineffective.

IJN minelayers show up at Rockhampton.

Two American heavy cruisers and two more light cruisers show up to bombard Bundaberg...




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 6/29/2021 10:39:18 AM >

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 2384
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/29/2021 10:41:56 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		The armored cars at Bowen aren't bombed or bombarded, attack in good order, but find Combat engineers there in good order behind forts 1, and get a 1-3 result. Even with the other Australian recce unit approaching (Stuarts) I fear we have to retreat out or risk losing the entire unit.

Will keep the rail line cut for as long as possible.





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 6/29/2021 10:43:18 AM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2385
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/29/2021 11:17:46 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Out of Rockhampton...now I am tempted to send the tanks up to south of Bowen, or all the way to threaten Townsville especially since Japan has not bombed ground troops, but I fear without air control it is a mistake...like when the IJA moved two armored units into Ceduna.

Plus, in 5 days another 100 tanks show up at Cape Town, and I will convert two Australian units to Lee/Grants (I think I will buy them out first) and that will be a big force improvement since most Australian tank units are operating around 30% of the TOE.

The goal of this operation has always been to remove the threat of land based air accumulation of strategic VP first, second to gain some combat experience, third focus Japan's attention here, and attrit Japanese strength.

Japan has gained so far only 1040 VP, a far cry from the normal 5K an Australian invasion normally achieves, which of course is invaluable to Japan in 44 and 45. Additionally, I think we have very favorably attrited Japanese airplanes in theater.

We still have almost 1,000 militia squads to upgrade into AMF 42 inf with their improvement to hard attack (15) and 3 point improvement in soft attack to 18. A little more than 50% done.

Plus most of the American subs above Bundaberg need their radar upgrades...














Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2386
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/29/2021 11:37:19 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		The new Japanese thrust is becoming clear...I feared an assault on Lanchow and had sent the Stuarts in that direction, they will reverse and head south.

The IJA cleverly avoided the shock crossing penalty by moving troops overland. Supply stockpile turned off at Chungking to hopefully flow some into this area.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2387
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/29/2021 1:34:23 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Picking a commander for my Wellingtons. They will be with me the whole war, so I want a decent one although only most of the skills are very hard to measure.

Primary activity will be night bombing. I doubt it does much, but I want a high land skill. Good inspiration, medium to low aggression, good leadership.

Who would you chose?




Attachment (1)

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 2388
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/29/2021 1:51:21 PM   
RangerJoe


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

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Picking a commander for my Wellingtons. They will be with me the whole war, so I want a decent one although only most of the skills are very hard to measure.

Primary activity will be night bombing. I doubt it does much, but I want a high land skill. Good inspiration, medium to low aggression, good leadership.

Who would you chose?





SLDR Austin, FJ

You want air skill, not land skill.

_____________________________

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 #: 2389
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/29/2021 1:52:40 PM   
mind_messing

 

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

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Picking a commander for my Wellingtons. They will be with me the whole war, so I want a decent one although only most of the skills are very hard to measure.

Primary activity will be night bombing. I doubt it does much, but I want a high land skill. Good inspiration, medium to low aggression, good leadership.

Who would you chose?



And I want to know what it is that you're smoking!

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2390
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/29/2021 1:56:30 PM   
mind_messing

 

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

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Glad it's just not me that struggles to get good mileage out of the R class. I sometimes wonder if the R in "R class" stands for "Right into torpedoes" as that's pretty much all I've seen them do in my experience.


Any port will do for the Ramillies atm. I wouldn't risk moving it myself, especially with that one hex speed limit.

IJ 250kg bombs will bounce off the deck armour, so all you need to worry about is 800kgs from the Betty/Nell/Kate or a naval bombardment (which looks fairly risky at this point). III Indian Corp flak should be enough to make any bombing a costly opposition, to say nothing of CAP

Just need to dodge torpedoes for a turn or two!



Not nearly enough escorts for the R class...I had sent several American destroyers over, but a lot of them have already paid the ultimate price or are upgrading for radar.

However, I was very disappointed to see the actual shells fired which was very few despite being heavily targeted by the Japanese, and plenty of burning IJN ships for her to fire at. Fired almost 0 6" shells for example.


Yeah, I don't think the escorts are really the problem with these ships. You could give them Porters or Fletchers and I think they'd still struggle to make an impact.

I wonder if it's just that the speed difference between 21 knots and 25 knots that makes all the difference in surface combat, at least where torpedo hits are concerned. If that's the case, then the R class will never see a surface action thanks to just about every IJN SCTF bristling with torpedoes.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2391
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/29/2021 2:07:50 PM   
BBfanboy


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

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Picking a commander for my Wellingtons. They will be with me the whole war, so I want a decent one although only most of the skills are very hard to measure.

Primary activity will be night bombing. I doubt it does much, but I want a high land skill. Good inspiration, medium to low aggression, good leadership.

Who would you chose?



And I want to know what it is that you're smoking!

C'mon guys! He obviously means in addition to Air Skill, he wants Land Skill in case it makes a difference in Ground Attack or Airfield/Port attacks.


_____________________________

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 mind_messing)
Post #: 2392
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/29/2021 2:12:10 PM   
BBfanboy


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

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Picking a commander for my Wellingtons. They will be with me the whole war, so I want a decent one although only most of the skills are very hard to measure.

Primary activity will be night bombing. I doubt it does much, but I want a high land skill. Good inspiration, medium to low aggression, good leadership.

Who would you chose?


I would see if I could find their overall Experience as pilots and include that in my decision. Aggressiveness around 54 seems reasonable. I think inspiration is very important for maintenance of morale in the face of losses.

I am not sure but higher Admin skill might get replacement aircraft or pilots sooner. I know the HQ and airbase size and supply enter into the replacements equation, I just think Admin means the guy can "work the system" efficiently.

_____________________________

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 #: 2393
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/29/2021 2:18:11 PM   
mind_messing

 

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

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Picking a commander for my Wellingtons. They will be with me the whole war, so I want a decent one although only most of the skills are very hard to measure.

Primary activity will be night bombing. I doubt it does much, but I want a high land skill. Good inspiration, medium to low aggression, good leadership.

Who would you chose?


I would see if I could find their overall Experience as pilots and include that in my decision. Aggressiveness around 54 seems reasonable. I think inspiration is very important for maintenance of morale in the face of losses.

I am not sure but higher Admin skill might get replacement aircraft or pilots sooner. I know the HQ and airbase size and supply enter into the replacements equation, I just think Admin means the guy can "work the system" efficiently.


For pilots that are also leaders, I wouldn't imagine their EXP would factor in to the consideration. Average pilot EXP has always seemed very important to me, especially in night bombing scenarios.

Replacement pilots are player controlled. Replacement aircraft are limited to 23/week.

I don't put much value on aggressiveness for bomber squadrons on ground bombing duties, it's the naval attack and fighter squadrons that I want the real fire-eaters for.

I've always seen leadership, Inspiration and Admin as the key skills for air co-ordination, but I'd never pick specifically for those for bomber squadrons. I'd rather have the skilled paper-pusher at the Air HQ level.

< Message edited by mind_messing -- 6/29/2021 2:19:07 PM >

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 2394
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/29/2021 2:55:24 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline 		The problem with leaders who are also pilots is that you do not know what type of aircraft that they are trained on. Having a fighter pilot command a bomber unit . . .

_____________________________

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 mind_messing)
Post #: 2395
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/29/2021 4:14:16 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Some interesting ideas there on the influence of air leader skills.

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 2396
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/29/2021 9:41:34 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		April 27th, 1942

Japan has no bombers in the area, at least that I can spot, so we stick around for the daylight bombardment and do good work.








Attachment (1)

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 2397
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/29/2021 9:44:06 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Japan attacks...these guys are merely buying time to allow the anti-tank guns and Stuarts to arrive south of Ankang. Need supplies here.





Ground combat at 83,45 (near Nanyang)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 30245 troops, 281 guns, 397 vehicles, Assault Value = 1005

Defending force 24482 troops, 123 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 781

Japanese adjusted assault: 847

Allied adjusted defense: 1576

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 2

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

Japanese ground losses:
187 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 21 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 15 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

Allied ground losses:
377 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 79 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 9 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 17 disabled
Guns lost 13 (1 destroyed, 12 disabled)

Assaulting units:
13th Tank Regiment
3rd Tank Regiment
8th Ind Engineer Regiment
15th Tank Regiment
15th Division
12th Tank Regiment
116th Division
10th Tank Regiment
13th Army
51st Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion
11th Field Artillery Regiment

Defending units:
55th Chinese Corps
41st Chinese Corps
77th Chinese Corps

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 6/29/2021 9:45:53 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2398
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/29/2021 10:04:03 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		As near as I can tell, awaiting recon on Charters Towers, but Japan has a scant 100 fighters protecting the coast, and this day a large percent of them flew LRCAP missions....

A lot of Japanese destroyers, light and heavy cruisers in the area!

If Bowen empties, we could paratroop drop into there...

Not much reinforcements for Japan at Townsville either.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2399
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 6/29/2021 10:06:25 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		Our hard working junk fleet fled Manila, only to be attacked by sea and air....

Not bad losses on the Airacobras.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 2400
Page:   <<   < prev  78 79 [80] 81 82   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  78 79 [80] 81 82   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

1.920