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: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace (J)

 
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: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace (J) Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/13/2021 7:09:06 AM   
DesertWolf101

 

Posts: 1445
Joined: 11/26/2016
Status: offline 		I got the turn back. Force Z and and a bunch of cruisers (all with full ammo) ended up two hexes away from the Japanese heavy force with just a couple of IJN destroyers between the two groups. The IJN force is very low on ammo and in no fit state for a fight, so it will undoubtedly attempt to flee away to safety. Interestingly, the IJN carrier force is all the way down near Batavia.

Now I have several choices here.

1) I can attempt to hunt down the Japanese ships but that would expose me to subsequent Japanese air strikes that this time are sure to come.
2) I can attempt to strike south towards the carriers but they are a fair distance away from me and are likely to skirt my attacks.
3) I could call it a day and race away at flank speed towards the safety of a friendly port and dense fighter cover.

Hmmm.....




Attachment (1)

(in reply to DesertWolf101)
Post #: 31
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/13/2021 7:14:12 AM   
DesertWolf101

 

Posts: 1445
Joined: 11/26/2016
Status: offline 		In terms of losses. Mauritius is battered but will survive unless attacked again. Drayton is 96 Float and 98 Fire damage so will be scuttled. So that's a total of 1 heavy cruiser and three destroyers (two old and one new) lost last turn.

Even after so much fighting last turn, slightly more than half of my original force is still fully loaded and battle ready while the enemy in the immediate area is depleted. I want to keep fighting, but what happens when the air phases come around?

(in reply to DesertWolf101)
Post #: 32
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/13/2021 12:32:59 PM   
BBfanboy


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

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101

In terms of losses. Mauritius is battered but will survive unless attacked again. Drayton is 96 Float and 98 Fire damage so will be scuttled. So that's a total of 1 heavy cruiser and three destroyers (two old and one new) lost last turn.

Even after so much fighting last turn, slightly more than half of my original force is still fully loaded and battle ready while the enemy in the immediate area is depleted. I want to keep fighting, but what happens when the air phases come around?

Depends how you look at it. If he gets good weather and has Air HQs in the area he could hit your heavy ships heavily during the air phase, almost certainly ensuring they do not escape to fight again. That will limit your ability to interdict short term.

OTOH, if your ships hit his major warships and sink a few, those are losses he cannot make up and it will limit his ability to defend a perimeter or protect his shipping. This is a longer term pain for him and IMO makes staying worthwhile.

_____________________________

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 DesertWolf101)
Post #: 33
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/13/2021 1:05:15 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline 		You can set a patrol hex away from the area with a reaction of 2 or 3 hexes. Having float planes on night search may allow your ships to react to his, then return to the patrol hex.

_____________________________

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 BBfanboy)
Post #: 34
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/13/2021 2:21:06 PM   
DesertWolf101

 

Posts: 1445
Joined: 11/26/2016
Status: offline 		Ok I think I figured out why Force Z did not engage. It had stopped to refuel its escorts. I found it with significant ops points consumed at the start of the turn. That changes everything. Hmm, I will have to improvise.

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 35
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/13/2021 10:46:55 PM   
DesertWolf101

 

Posts: 1445
Joined: 11/26/2016
Status: offline 		December 22, 1941

The Prince of Wales is hit!

With Force Z's ops points sky high at the start of the turn, (something which tbh I did not even know was possible since I thought every task force started with clean ops points), I was clearly in a bit of trouble. I therefore decided to forget about the Japanese covering force and instead focus on suppressing the enemy airfields in the area that could strike back. I also ordered Force Z to head to Tambelan, a dot base a single hex away, and disband there.

Unfortunately for me things didn't work out as planned. Force Z headed to the next hex but refused to disband until the air phase was over, and both my bombardment task forces didn't suppress the airfields. One slammed into the fleeing Japanese ships and was thus slowed down, and the other refused to move from its hex despite being only four hexes from its target, Sinkawang.

The result was that Prince of Wales took three torpedo hits and is badly damaged and is only able to make 9 knots at flank speed. Light cruiser Enterprise also took a torpedo but is mostly fine. Rounding out the band news of the day, I move Hermes's Swordfish squadron to Singapore but they failed to score any torpedo hits on the fleeing Japanese heavy ships due to bad weather.

In terms of the good news, some of my destroyers ranged out and sank a three troop laden Japanese ships, and my fighters took a heavy toll on Japanese Sallys and Bettys thanks to a CAP trap and some LRCAP over my cruisers. Days air losses were 14 to 41 in my favor.

Will have to carefully think through next steps. I will very likely have to write off Prince of Wales here. The overall goal has been met though, which is to throw the Japanese into disarray and to put the Palembang oil fields at severe risk. If I play my cards right I think I have a very good chance of inflicting severe damage to them.

(in reply to DesertWolf101)
Post #: 36
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/13/2021 11:31:48 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline 		A suggestion for the next time, put in a "Do Not Refuel" order!

_____________________________

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 DesertWolf101)
Post #: 37
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/15/2021 8:44:14 PM   
DesertWolf101

 

Posts: 1445
Joined: 11/26/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

A suggestion for the next time, put in a "Do Not Refuel" order!


Lesson learned!

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 38
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/15/2021 9:01:48 PM   
DesertWolf101

 

Posts: 1445
Joined: 11/26/2016
Status: offline 		December 23, 1941

Having lured Wirraway into an early attack on Palembang and driven his fleet from the area (not to mention finally solved my Ops points problem), I moved this turn to accomplish the next step of my plan which is to shut down the critical Japanese airfields in the area. Both Sinkawang and Palembang were heavily hit by cruiser bombardment, destroying 19 aircraft on the ground and shutting them both down. I also noticed a heavy cruiser force moving in from the north so I sent the 4 Clemson class destroyers operating in the area to interfere with and delay it. At the cost of the 4 old destroyers, I forced the cruiser force to expend what I am pretty sure was all its torpedoes and the vast majority of its ammo. This will force them to turn back to Indochina to rearm which buys me another 4-5 days of critical operations around Palembang without significant Japanese naval interference.

Speaking of Palembang, I now have 60 ready heavy bombers in Java who will be tasked, along with Dutch and Commonwealth medium bombers, to strike at the oilfields. In almost perfect timing, Soerabaja's airfields will reach level 5 next turn which should dramatically increase the effectiveness of my heavy bombers. Allied naval forces will be tasked with keeping the airfield at Palembang closed over the next four days. If weather holds, I will have hopefully inflicted some very good damage by then which will allow me to shift some of the bombers operations to keeping the airfields closed and thus free up the cruisers.

To sum up, at the cost of 6 Clemson class destroyers, the Houston, and a damaged POW, I am now in a great position to go all out against Palembang. Unfortunately weather over Palembang shows thunderstorms, so it can't be all perfect...

Oh, with regards to POW - it made 6 turns and is close to Java. The biggest risk to the ship now is IJN submarines. I still have 14 destroyers in the immediate area. I am hoping that I can keep her safe over the next few days to get her out, but I am not counting on it until it happens.

(in reply to DesertWolf101)
Post #: 39
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/16/2021 3:13:30 AM   
Alfred

 

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

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

A suggestion for the next time, put in a "Do Not Refuel" order!


Lesson learned!


At sea refuelling is not determined by those settings.

Alfred

(in reply to DesertWolf101)
Post #: 40
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/16/2021 12:46:29 PM   
DesertWolf101

 

Posts: 1445
Joined: 11/26/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred


quote:

ORIGINAL: DesertWolf101


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

A suggestion for the next time, put in a "Do Not Refuel" order!


Lesson learned!


At sea refuelling is not determined by those settings.

Alfred


Good to know! What are the variables to keep in mind that could be affecting the ops points situation of underway surface task forces?

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 41
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/16/2021 2:11:20 PM   
Alfred

 

Posts: 6685
Joined: 9/28/2006
Status: offline 		Insufficient data to be definitive.

Refueling might not have been the only factor in play, just the most obvious when you were again able to examine the TF. TFs not behaving as expected might result from:


* use of waypoints

* threat assessments

* daisy wheel following

all of which can slow down or alter the ultimate approach route.


Automatic at sea refueling comes into play when a ship's bunkers are down to 70% fuel. Then it seeks to top off its bunkers from any eligible ships in the hex. The more TFs present in the hex, the more likely eligible ships will be found. Having a single TF in the hex tends to reduce the number of eligible ships as ships who do not have spare bunker fuel are not eligible.

If Force Z had been ordered to move to Palembang, that would never have happened anyway as the approach route to that base involves sailing up a navigable river. Same problem if it was reacting to an enemy TF which did sail to Palembang.

Alfred

(in reply to DesertWolf101)
Post #: 42
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/16/2021 7:18:03 PM   
DesertWolf101

 

Posts: 1445
Joined: 11/26/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alfred

Insufficient data to be definitive.

Refueling might not have been the only factor in play, just the most obvious when you were again able to examine the TF. TFs not behaving as expected might result from:


* use of waypoints

* threat assessments

* daisy wheel following

all of which can slow down or alter the ultimate approach route.


Automatic at sea refueling comes into play when a ship's bunkers are down to 70% fuel. Then it seeks to top off its bunkers from any eligible ships in the hex. The more TFs present in the hex, the more likely eligible ships will be found. Having a single TF in the hex tends to reduce the number of eligible ships as ships who do not have spare bunker fuel are not eligible.

If Force Z had been ordered to move to Palembang, that would never have happened anyway as the approach route to that base involves sailing up a navigable river. Same problem if it was reacting to an enemy TF which did sail to Palembang.

Alfred


Thanks Alfred. For Force Z this I had set a single patrol point with reaction 4 about 4 hexes away to the east from its starting position at Billiton. From the variables you outlined I think in this case the destroyers were low on fuel and likely sought to top off from POW and Repulse who had more than 70%.

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 43
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/16/2021 7:21:45 PM   
DesertWolf101

 

Posts: 1445
Joined: 11/26/2016
Status: offline 		December 24, 1941

Dismal weather across the Java Sea today so none of my bombers or fighter sweeps flew. Soerabaja did get to level 5 airfields so at least when the bombers do fly they will fly with full loads. Got in another naval bombardment of Palembang but I believe Wirraway is flying in as many engineers as he can to repair the airfields and I can also see he is rushing in numerous submarines and other combat task forces so my window here is definitely limited.

Clear weather reported over Palembang tomorrow - will my bombers fly?

(in reply to DesertWolf101)
Post #: 44
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/16/2021 7:53:02 PM   
Andy Mac

 

Posts: 15222
Joined: 5/12/2004
From: Alexandria, Scotland
Status: offline 		Are you allowed to night bomb ? Maybe lay some mines at Palembang ?

(in reply to DesertWolf101)
Post #: 45
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/17/2021 6:10:46 AM   
DesertWolf101

 

Posts: 1445
Joined: 11/26/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andy Mac

Are you allowed to night bomb ? Maybe lay some mines at Palembang ?


Mines are already present in Palembang. We are allowed to night bomb but I won't be needing that tactic until he effectively opposes me during the daylight hours.

(in reply to Andy Mac)
Post #: 46
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/17/2021 6:21:48 AM   
DesertWolf101

 

Posts: 1445
Joined: 11/26/2016
Status: offline 		December 25, 1941

The bombers flew! They found a gap in the morning weather and pounced on Palembang in light rain conditions. The airfields were still down so no opposition was encountered. Wave after wave of Dutch, Australian, and American bombers hit the oil fields. Recon at the end of the turn shows 168 of the 900 oil wells damaged, all at the cost of just two Hudson bombers to the disrupted flak. The bombers will try to go in again but this time I expect more serious opposition from the Japanese. They know what's at stake and I wouldn't be surprised to see some desperate measures being taken by Wirraway here.

The excellent day was somewhat diminished by the unfortunate demise of the Prince of Wales. I had managed to bring her out of immediate danger and she was already some distance away from Java when she suffered catastrophic damage control failure, keeled over, and disappeared under the waves. I guess I pushed her a bit too far in my haste to get her out of reach of the circling IJN subs. Still, there is no question in my mind that the loss of the POW, Houston, and six old Clemson class destroyers is a price well worth paying for what the operation has achieved thus far.

(in reply to DesertWolf101)
Post #: 47
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/18/2021 8:48:22 AM   
DesertWolf101

 

Posts: 1445
Joined: 11/26/2016
Status: offline 		December 26, 1941

SRA

The bombers took off in large numbers once more to strike at Palembang but this is no longer a milk run. The forward fighter airfield was flooded by rains which led to the bombers going in first without support. The Dutch medium bombers were shredded by Japanese fighter CAP, losing 38 of their number for the day but the survivors still pushed through to drop their payloads and score numerous hits. By the time the Australian Hudson and American B-17 bombers arrived, there was no longer any Japanese fighter defense left. By the end of the day, Palembang's damaged oil wells had grown to 341 out of the 900 total, which is almost 38% of the wells. Total air losses for the day were 40 to 9 in the Japanese favor, but this is a very minor price to pay for the overall damage inflicted to the Empire's prospective economy. Yet another all out effort is ordered for tomorrow.

A Fubuki class destroyer is torpedoed by a Dutch sub and confirmed sunk near Manado.

China

The Japanese have massed their armor and are advancing down the dirt road towards Sian. The Chinese forces in rough terrain that are facing them are unlikely to be unable to withstand the assault for long given low morale and the absence of heavy weapons. I am trying to rush in another Corps to bring the total force to just under the max 40,000 stacking limit but I doubt it will arrive in time.

Southwest Pacific

Japanese forces have landed in Rabaul and have found the base largely abandoned. I am concentrating on building up Port Moresby instead where I have positioned 400 AV thus far. The KB is around and I expect it to sink some small xAKs next turn that I have ordered to keep unloading at Port Moresby to get as much ashore before the siege effectively begins.

(in reply to DesertWolf101)
Post #: 48
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/18/2021 2:07:10 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		I have used a ton of disband to port orders...and it is always very, very risky for reasons Alfred mentions and others.

I may have noticed better chances of success with different mission types, although that too carries a lot of risk.

One tactic, I never see get discussed much, would be for the ammo depleted IJN SAG to switch their mission from Surface to Escort as it flees for example. Mission changes while at sea and threatened...a good tactic to keep up your sleeve. Just be sure you understand the mission and it synchronizes with your situation.




(in reply to DesertWolf101)
Post #: 49
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/18/2021 3:13:26 PM   
Alfred

 

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

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

I have used a ton of disband to port orders...and it is always very, very risky for reasons Alfred mentions and others.

I may have noticed better chances of success with different mission types, although that too carries a lot of risk.

One tactic, I never see get discussed much, would be for the ammo depleted IJN SAG to switch their mission from Surface to Escort as it flees for example. Mission changes while at sea and threatened...a good tactic to keep up your sleeve. Just be sure you understand the mission and it synchronizes with your situation.






That is not a useful idea.

The definition of the Escort" mission in the manual is somewhat misleading. The key element of this mission is that the TF must contain at least one very severely damaged ship for it to maintain this classification. If the only severely damaged ship is lost (eg it flounders at sea), the TF automatically reverts to the highest mission which the remaining not severely damaged ships can perform. Usually this means it reverts back to a Surface Combat mission.

Alfred

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 50
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/18/2021 10:38:50 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 13450
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline 		For me, I have used escort missions for cargo/transport TFs when the ships had no damage. The mission type did not change.

_____________________________

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 #: 51
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/18/2021 11:05:04 PM   
Nomad


Posts: 5905
Joined: 9/5/2001
From: West Yellowstone, Montana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

For me, I have used escort missions for cargo/transport TFs when the ships had no damage. The mission type did not change.


I also have used escort missions with undamaged ships and no change occurred. Mostly this is to facilitate moving short ranged ships to a new location outside their range.

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 52
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/19/2021 12:37:59 AM   
Alfred

 

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

ORIGINAL: Nomad


quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

For me, I have used escort missions for cargo/transport TFs when the ships had no damage. The mission type did not change.


I also have used escort missions with undamaged ships and no change occurred. Mostly this is to facilitate moving short ranged ships to a new location outside their range.


You can tell Don Bowen he was wrong.

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2258934&mpage=1&key=escort�

Every auto created Escort TF I have seen which lost its severely damaged ship reverted to a combat TF.

The Support TF is the mission intended to relocate ships from A to B. It deliberately excludes heavy combat vessels. In classical WITP I am certain (albeit without any direct evidence to support my belief) that certain players deliberately used Escort as a Romulan cloaking device until the TF was in position at which point it uncloaked to unleash an alpha air strike. Similar behaviour in AE would not be looked upon favourably by the devs.

Alfred

(in reply to Nomad)
Post #: 53
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/19/2021 1:07:15 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		Sometimes I form an escort TF with disparate ships I just want to get an escort in with to send them somewhere. Maybe it's that the mix of types is not compatible with any other TF type? Just a thought...

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Alfred)
Post #: 54
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/19/2021 5:22:00 AM   
DesertWolf101

 

Posts: 1445
Joined: 11/26/2016
Status: offline 		December 27, 1941

SRA

Unfortunately the weather has turned against me once more. This time the only aircraft that flew were the fighters. Total aircraft losses for the day in all theaters were 14 Allied to 10 Japanese. I think there is a very good chance that the weather break has given Wirraway the time needed to repair the airfield enough to bring in fighters directly to Palembang. It's going to be harder and harder to punch through.

Southwest Pacific

Rabaul is taken by the Japanese. The ships still offloading at Port Moresby were sunk by the KB as expected. Only devices lost however was some motorized support.




(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 55
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/19/2021 3:45:24 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 22133
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline 		You misunderstand what I do...

I manually change the task force from Surface to Escort while at sea using the mission button.

I have had great success in avoiding naval fights...in the lower left text block it says an encounter has occurred, but there is no combat...some type of evasion.

It is particularly effective in getting destroyers with low ammo out of harms way.

I send a destroyer SAG into an enemy port where they encounter one or more enemy task forces where they fight, and don't manage to retreat far away by the end of the turn (using up their op points in fighting instead of moving).

The next day I use the mission button to switch them from surface to escort, even though there might not be any damaged ships...works very well in avoiding combat given the information I can read/see.

Now, I do recall seeing some auto switching of TFs back to surface...but I don't believe it happens every time with manually switched task forces as opposed to auto created escort task forces -- but I will pay attention more attention to it in the future.

I do know that carriers can be in an escort task force and still fly aerial missions and although I don't use that technique, I don't believe they switch to air combat task forces every day from escort mission task force.

Something to check out...

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 10/19/2021 3:48:41 PM >

(in reply to DesertWolf101)
Post #: 56
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/19/2021 5:01:40 PM   
BBfanboy


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

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

You misunderstand what I do...

I manually change the task force from Surface to Escort while at sea using the mission button.

I have had great success in avoiding naval fights...in the lower left text block it says an encounter has occurred, but there is no combat...some type of evasion.

It is particularly effective in getting destroyers with low ammo out of harms way.

I send a destroyer SAG into an enemy port where they encounter one or more enemy task forces where they fight, and don't manage to retreat far away by the end of the turn (using up their op points in fighting instead of moving).

The next day I use the mission button to switch them from surface to escort, even though there might not be any damaged ships...works very well in avoiding combat given the information I can read/see.

Now, I do recall seeing some auto switching of TFs back to surface...but I don't believe it happens every time with manually switched task forces as opposed to auto created escort task forces -- but I will pay attention more attention to it in the future.

I do know that carriers can be in an escort task force and still fly aerial missions and although I don't use that technique, I don't believe they switch to air combat task forces every day from escort mission task force.

Something to check out...

In the DD SAG example, could it not be that the shortage of ammo is what makes the TF averse to further surface combat and lets the Escort mission type stick? IOW, even without the Escort mission, the TF would behave the same?

_____________________________

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 #: 57
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/19/2021 7:51:07 PM   
Lowpe


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

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

You misunderstand what I do...

I manually change the task force from Surface to Escort while at sea using the mission button.

I have had great success in avoiding naval fights...in the lower left text block it says an encounter has occurred, but there is no combat...some type of evasion.

It is particularly effective in getting destroyers with low ammo out of harms way.

I send a destroyer SAG into an enemy port where they encounter one or more enemy task forces where they fight, and don't manage to retreat far away by the end of the turn (using up their op points in fighting instead of moving).

The next day I use the mission button to switch them from surface to escort, even though there might not be any damaged ships...works very well in avoiding combat given the information I can read/see.

Now, I do recall seeing some auto switching of TFs back to surface...but I don't believe it happens every time with manually switched task forces as opposed to auto created escort task forces -- but I will pay attention more attention to it in the future.

I do know that carriers can be in an escort task force and still fly aerial missions and although I don't use that technique, I don't believe they switch to air combat task forces every day from escort mission task force.

Something to check out...

In the DD SAG example, could it not be that the shortage of ammo is what makes the TF averse to further surface combat and lets the Escort mission type stick? IOW, even without the Escort mission, the TF would behave the same?


In my experience, no.

When the Surface task force with low ammo encounters an enemy surface task force, it goes to the combat animation and one of the first messages that pops up is something to the effect that the low ammo task force attempts to break combat...sometimes they do evade or withdraw, but most times they don't until after a few rounds of combat.


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 58
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/20/2021 1:02:48 AM   
DesertWolf101

 

Posts: 1445
Joined: 11/26/2016
Status: offline 		December 28, 1941

SRA

The weather over Palembang was overcast and all aircraft flew their missions as ordered. Surprisingly weak CAP of only about 15 Zeros was encountered, and Dutch fighters did their job and largely kept the Zeros from inflicting damage. The bulk of the bombers went after Palembang's airfields instead of the oil and registered numerous hits. The bombers that did go after the oil still did a good job, with the number of damaged oil wells having now climbed to 421 out of 900. With the reassurance that the airfields are down, I will now order all bombers to target the oil for tomorrow.

Burma

Zeros swept over Rangoon today and were dealt a bloody nose by the Flying Tigers. Nice to see a good result against Japan's best fighter airframes.

China

I sent in a reduced P-40E squadron to Wenchow to intercept now routine enemy bombing raids of the base. The American fighters did an excellent job, knocking out half a dozen Nates and ten or so bombers.

All together a good turn in the air for Allied forces.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 59
RE: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace... - 10/20/2021 4:49:04 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline 		Nearly halve of the oil gone at Palembang, feels like game over already even if one doesn't even notice it yet. It's not all about the 400k supplies that it needs to repair the oilfields but the 400 days with reduced production. If you keep pounding the oilfields and will be able to pretty much destroy them you can as well stop playing as I wonder if a Japanese player will continue if he has no oil left at the start of 43.

_____________________________


(in reply to DesertWolf101)
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: A War to be Won - DesertWolf101 (A) vs Wirraway_Ace (J) 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

1.391