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: Nakajima C6N1-S Saiun "Myrt"

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> After Action Reports >> RE: Nakajima C6N1-S Saiun "Myrt" Page: <<   < prev  86 87 [88] 89 90   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Nakajima C6N1-S Saiun "Myrt" - 7/3/2006 11:42:53 AM   
pauk


Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline
Chez, i couldn't agree more with you...

Overstacking is the main issue there, i think - Makale AF level 1 have 100 planes. I'm not sure about Namlea and Wasile but one thing is for sure - without overstacking Andy wouldn't be able lift so much supply and men in just few days and it would take a little more until he could attack next target.

I did it to Andy in our game. My paras took Lanchow i think because he left only BF in that base, and latter airlifted bde (have to pay PP...etc).. His mistake. Leaving such important base without cover isn't same as leaving some minor malaria bases in the sulavesi (don't forget that PzB simply doesn't have enough units to cover all the bases). Someone will probably disagree here but A is not equal with B.

Market Garden, Crete were big airborne operations - but i don't think that even German paratroopers&transports carried concrete and all stuff needed for building a big airfield. But each to his own.


btw, i think you should discuss about stacking limit with Andy - he likes that, very much, i can assure you... didn't proposed this house rule at the start of the game because i didn't thought that there is so many people which uses overstacking. But this is one of my favourite HR for the next games...



_____________________________


(in reply to ChezDaJez)
Post #: 2611
RE: Nakajima C6N1-S Saiun "Myrt" - 7/3/2006 12:24:28 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ChezDaJez

There is one area of the game (anyone's game including my own) that I do not agree with and that is the deliberate overstacking of airfields with the intent to use them to launch massive bombing raids or CAP. I have a PBEM going at the moment where my opponent has over 400 heavies and 300+ fighters at Pomala, a level 3 airfield. The entire area within B-17 normal range (10 hexes) is now off limits to any IJ naval vessels and all airfields have been closed. My opponent hasn't had to support an invasion with his major naval units or carriers in several months. My view is that he will move against the PI next and be bombing Japan within 6-8 months and there is nothing I can do to stop it. Most of my carriers and battleships are in drydock due to the massive B-17 raids. In one attack alone he scored over 100 bomb hits against 4 batteships from 300 B-17s. I won't even mention how many aircraft I have lost but my loss rates are close to yours and his best fighter is the P-38! Our game is only in 11/42! Unfortunately we don't have any house rules regarding overstacking airfields.
Chez



I´ve got three PBEMs going at the moment. If the two American opponents would do something like that then I would ask them if they would agree that this is a bit weird (I don´t put 500 Nells and Betties anywhere - and we have a stacking rule) and to stop it. I don´t know if I would want to continue the game if I would see 100+ 4E bombers on 6000 feet bombing my ships and scoring 100 hits.

If my third opponent - a friend of mine - would do that, then I would drive to his place and would kick him in his balls!

< Message edited by castor troy -- 7/3/2006 12:25:17 PM >

(in reply to ChezDaJez)
Post #: 2612
RE: Nakajima C6N1-S Saiun "Myrt" - 7/3/2006 12:55:13 PM   
AmiralLaurent

 

Posts: 3351
Joined: 3/11/2003
From: Near Paris, France
Status: offline
The problem with overstacking is that the penalities for it that are in the manual didn't exist in the game...

When I read the manual, it seems to me that for each batch 50 AC above AF capacity, 25% won't fly. That is 130 AC on a size 1 AF means 50% AC grounded = 65 available, no Air HQ probably again 25% AC grounded = 48 available, and 82 waiting to be bombed on the ground... While 50 AC on the AF would be 36 available and 14 grounded, so almost as efficient and with no overstacking.

Also according to the manual B-17 shouldn't fly from size 3 AF, and B-29 from size 6 AF

But it is not working like that. And it is a pity.

The problem then is that the biggest AF will only have 500 AC, and so be unable to do anything to death star that may have 1000-2000 AC... Then that is another problem.

By the way these formidable concentrations are also possible because once an AF has 250 air support squads, it may support an infinite number of AC... I have never understood the logic of this one, as the game will track support squads for ground troops in far greater number, as it should be.

My own opinion is that no raid should be more than 200 AC strong (but this will depend of where they come...), and that CAP should be limited to 200 too, but also to 3 times the number of attacking AC, so enabling small raids to sneak in sometimes as they did. Then we will see AC attacking in waves (as they always did in every Pacific battle) and the uber-CAP may be no more a problem. So CVs will be less immune to LBA and less daring in their sailing.

Of course then the US heavy bombers should be less numerous, far worst in hitting ships and far more serviceable....

And in the end you finish by change the whole air model.

My opinion is that the air model was tested with small to medium air battles and is working well... The game just achieved silly results when players concentrated units that were scattered in RL everywhere (for example, when a CV TF was attacked, only 4 CV max were providing CAP, not 12-16, and a raid with 50 heavy bombers was huge, and needed a week of preparation, you can have 300 000 men battling for an atoll). But the real problem is that nothing in the game is hindering such concentration, and achieveing concentration faster than your enemy at the critical point is the key in any military operation, so we all do that. The pity is that in WITP this concentration is unlimited, and so once a side has an edge (Japan until summer 42, Allied after summer 43), it has no more need to think about manoeuver, all he had to do it to gather and then advance as a steam roller...

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 2613
RE: Nakajima C6N1-S Saiun "Myrt" - 7/3/2006 12:58:50 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent

The problem with overstacking is that the penalities for it that are in the manual didn't exist in the game...

When I read the manual, it seems to me that for each batch 50 AC above AF capacity, 25% won't fly. That is 130 AC on a size 1 AF means 50% AC grounded = 65 available, no Air HQ probably again 25% AC grounded = 48 available, and 82 waiting to be bombed on the ground... While 50 AC on the AF would be 36 available and 14 grounded, so almost as efficient and with no overstacking.

Also according to the manual B-17 shouldn't fly from size 3 AF, and B-29 from size 6 AF

But it is not working like that. And it is a pity.

The problem then is that the biggest AF will only have 500 AC, and so be unable to do anything to death star that may have 1000-2000 AC... Then that is another problem.

By the way these formidable concentrations are also possible because once an AF has 250 air support squads, it may support an infinite number of AC... I have never understood the logic of this one, as the game will track support squads for ground troops in far greater number, as it should be.

My own opinion is that no raid should be more than 200 AC strong (but this will depend of where they come...), and that CAP should be limited to 200 too, but also to 3 times the number of attacking AC, so enabling small raids to sneak in sometimes as they did. Then we will see AC attacking in waves (as they always did in every Pacific battle) and the uber-CAP may be no more a problem. So CVs will be less immune to LBA and less daring in their sailing.

Of course then the US heavy bombers should be less numerous, far worst in hitting ships and far more serviceable....

And in the end you finish by change the whole air model.

My opinion is that the air model was tested with small to medium air battles and is working well... The game just achieved silly results when players concentrated units that were scattered in RL everywhere (for example, when a CV TF was attacked, only 4 CV max were providing CAP, not 12-16, and a raid with 50 heavy bombers was huge, and needed a week of preparation, you can have 300 000 men battling for an atoll). But the real problem is that nothing in the game is hindering such concentration, and achieveing concentration faster than your enemy at the critical point is the key in any military operation, so we all do that. The pity is that in WITP this concentration is unlimited, and so once a side has an edge (Japan until summer 42, Allied after summer 43), it has no more need to think about manoeuver, all he had to do it to gather and then advance as a steam roller...




totally agree here!

(in reply to AmiralLaurent)
Post #: 2614
RE: Nakajima C6N1-S Saiun "Myrt" - 7/3/2006 1:24:53 PM   
duckenf

 

Posts: 189
Joined: 7/1/2004
From: London, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PzB

In 'Hangover' I managed to capture Karachi because half the Allied Army was cut of in Dehli, thus
I avoided the super garrison problem. Still, any invasion of India is a big risk... But I also think
it shouldn't be launched unless both players agree that Japan is allowed to try.


I think the "super-garrison" of Karachi is an anomaly of the map/edge -- if Japan knocks out India, it is foolish to think that they can leave fairly meagre defensive forces there when the brunt of an allied re-invasion could have occurred by way of Iran/Suez/Eastern Africa. As it is, the allies are forced to make any moves from Australia. So getting the Japanese bogged down in a seige of Karachi is probably as good a way as any to model off-board allied activity. The only alternative would be a special uninvadable allied supply hex representing the rest of the British Empire.

I'm pretty sure PzB was airlifting units into combat in 1942 in India--airlifting units was instrumental in the taking of Dimapur and turning the allied line in Burma. That takes nothing away from Hangover which was a model combined arms operation.

As far as Andy's airborne attacks, I think he has been pretty modest with them and has suffered some setbacks doing so. In any event, it is worth thinking where he got the idea; from reading your thread, I have been impressed with how you have used the full range of forces at your disposal; and usually quite cleverly, too. The problem is that by 1944, the things the Japanese can do, the Allies can do in a major way. You've been using transports to reinforce outposts and as the centrepiece of your attmepts to counter-attack on islands Andy invades. Now he's turned the tables and actually been pretty limited in his efforts compared to what you did earlier -- add to that that you've punished him somewhat on his recent series of operations, I don't really see that you have grounds to complain. You didn't complain earlier about unrealistic transport ability when the following occurred:

quote:


Original: PzB
I flew in some reinforcements and Kai Island repulsed the first attack!
Sending in my only 2 PT boats in case Andy tries to move more troops in unescorted

quote:


Original:PzB
Advantage: We got large bases within transport ac range of all Northern NG bases.
Some 300 transports can bring in a lot of reinforcements in no time. This is were we put
the foot down!

quote:


Original:pzB
Noemfoor next!
I didn't think Andy was ready to jump again that soon. There are two options:
Noemfoor, the obvious one - or Manokwari just to the NW if the first is a ruse!
Too much hardware being used to be a ruse, good thing I put the transports in action
yesterday. 20+ were lost but several reinforcements were airlifted in including a
heavy AA unit from Truk and a Heavy Artillery unit from Morotai.


Heavy artillery on transport aircraft?

quote:


Original: PzB
Noemfoor Invaded
Don't misunderstand me, Andy
will be back, but this buys us valuable time and he can't keep his carriers around
forever. Give me a window and 10k more troops will stalemate the place permanently!


To remove any doubt -- this is time to airlift in 10,000 troops which duly stalemated an allied objective. If regular invasion/combat had occurred without aerial reinforcement, Noemfoor would have fallen.

quote:


Original:PzB
I got an Independent Brigade nearby that can be airlifted in. This will cost me a lot of transports
though - but there are no other options if I want to halt Andy here. In the meanwhile I'm reinforcing
the rest of the bases in Northern New Guinea. Only 3 bases left here now.
My goal is to cast him of schedule and enforce a sitzkrieg for
a while so I can strengthen my position and bring in more reinforcements
.


quote:

Gentlemen, I need your help to finish a cunning plan to destroy the enemy fleet
New development indicates an enemy landing at Morotai or Wasile! The enemy fleet has moved
closer and while the heavies hit both Morotai and Wasile, a huge carrier strike force hit
Wasile which is a size 1(3) base with 264 assault points and 5 forts. An obvious target just
like Kai Island. Morotai is a super fortress...

So I've ordered transport ac to fly in reinforcements to Wasile and stacked Menando with Zekes,
Jills and Judy while Davao got all my long range A6M2s, Oscar IIs, Army and Navy bombers.


There's even a map of the cunning plan with transport aircraft locations/targets indicated (there are also 460 aircraft at Manando and 520 at Davao, I'm guessing more than 50Xairfield):




PzB did pay an overstacking price, though:

quote:

Guess this is a penalty for overstacking, but it is as I told Andy - a wet dream to get coordinated strikes these days.
Both my bases had 250+ AS and an Air HQ. Morotai managed to launch a biggie, guess it should have been the other way around.



quote:

Bad weather covered Noemfoor in the AM phase and a large part of the 32 Independent
Brigade was airlifted in. In the PM phase Allied fighters cut down 20 transports, but
I'm satisfied for now.


And in India:

quote:

The fall of Imphal was also satisfactory, supplies will be flown in - then a base force and some fighters.
In Dimapur I've moved a partial base force in, but an enemy unit appeared today. A naval garrison unit will be airlifted in
tonight - I hope I can hold. Need a few days to secure my new bases - but at least I'm forcing Al to disperse his units.


quote:

The first Allied attempt to recapture Dimapur failed, and I'm continuing to airlift reinforcements. As we captured a huge stockpile of supplies, this is not a worry. Matters are different at Imphal though, but that base is much closer to my other bases.


< Message edited by medck -- 7/3/2006 1:26:58 PM >

(in reply to PzB74)
Post #: 2615
RE: Nakajima C6N1-S Saiun "Myrt" - 7/3/2006 6:09:46 PM   
PzB74


Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline
There are many issues with WitP that are quite invisible when you first start
playing. 1942-43 are quite innocent really, when 44-45 arrives the age of innocence is truly over.

The use of air transports to ferry in base force and garrison units was quite ok in 42.
No one complained even though it was a bit strange that heavy artillery could be transported in small flimsy ac.

When my invasion of a small atoll was halted by an air transport effort near Tarawa, the stage
was set for a massive escalation. During the invasion of central and northern PNG large numbers of troops
were airlifted to reinforce threatened bases. These bases were relatively large though, size 4-6 AF.

In the next stage several bases on Sulawesi were captured by paras. No complaints really.
This time the escalation included massive overstacking the af at Wasile. I tried to counter Andys attack by
overstacking Menando and Morotai. Andy did so and ferried in huge amounts of supplies and troops first to Wasile,
and then to Tomino and Makale - size 1 airfields.

As I admitted in my earlier posts it is difficult to ask for new house rules without incriminating oneself.
I've not tried to blame Andy for using these tactics, but it has been hard to hide my annoyance over their
effectiveness Personally I'm willing to halt my use of transports to reinforce threatened bases. This
would deprieve me of a very effective way to reinforce e.g. the Marianas. In return I want Andy to use his
massive resources a bit more traditionally.

A give and take proposition in other words. After discussing overstacking with Andy he may be willing to limit
the amount of ac to 100 pr af size up to size 6. That's as much as he's willing to give, so I will concur.
Hopefully we can agree on only air lifting in moderate amounts of troops (except from paras) the next time
we wish to reinforce a base. I'm thinking of something like this: 50 transports can airlift into a size 1 af. 250
for a size 5 base. BUT the number of friendly ac based in the target AF has to be deducted from the number
of transports. What do you think?

Another thing I may ask of Andy is to limit the use of heavy bombers in a naval attack role. Japan doesn't have
any heavy bombers, so I don't feel I'm out on a limb here He got so many mediumes and strike ac that I don't
see why he should use B-29's to attack my remaining fleet assets anyway. If Andy wants concessions from me in
return, that's ok.

Always nice with a good discussion, and I think these topics are fairly 'hot' despite of old age....

< Message edited by PzB -- 7/3/2006 6:24:58 PM >


_____________________________



"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to duckenf)
Post #: 2616
RE: Nakajima C6N1-S Saiun "Myrt" - 7/3/2006 6:28:28 PM   
PzB74


Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline
Not a lot to report, barge and LCU busting and massive bombing raids
on bases throughout PNG and the Central Pacific.

The good news is that Strike Force I is evading the enemy carriers!
Think all the destroyers and carriers will make it at least.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/20/44



_____________________________



"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to PzB74)
Post #: 2617
RE: Nakajima C6N1-S Saiun "Myrt" - 7/3/2006 6:51:05 PM   
pauk


Posts: 4162
Joined: 10/21/2001
From: Zagreb,Croatia
Status: offline
greetings....

i think that you shouldn't ask for another house rule. What is done is done and there is no turning back.... Introducing new house rules have a high chance to provide another mess. When my worthy opponent asked me about my intentions in China and expressed his fear that i would/could conquer the whole China i was generous and offer that Chungking and Chengtu can not be attacked.... now i have situation that Chengtu is only lightly defended with two units....knowing i wont attack this base...

I do not blame him, cause if i were him i probably wont look at the things like i view that from Japs side - i just wanted to point how difficult is to introduce new HR...which will need another one, etc, etc....

In the end, i lost initiative in China and messed things - i can not blame anyone than me mistakes are made by me. But once when you lost initiative you can't regain it - if you are Japanese.

I guess this was a good lesson for all of us.... arrange all house rules (and notice your opponent if you want to use some "special" tactics like picket ships, overstacking, landing on non dot /non bases hexes, bombing Chinese resources, etc, before you even start a game)...

_____________________________


(in reply to PzB74)
Post #: 2618
RE: Nakajima C6N1-S Saiun "Myrt" - 7/3/2006 7:56:47 PM   
AmiralLaurent

 

Posts: 3351
Joined: 3/11/2003
From: Near Paris, France
Status: offline
As a return gift if Andy is stopping to use heavy bombers in naval attacks, you can propose to use torpedo bombers only from place where there is a big IJNAF BF (Special Force, or 'Base Name' Force (Palau Base Force for example)), not a tiny IJNAF BF with 200 mechanics, or an Army BF that had nothing to do with torpedoes.

In late games I should admit that almost all my successes were when Allied bombers tried to attack heavy surface ships a long range. With an efficient CAP, air losses were in Japanese favor (outside P-38 range) and even the surviving bombers won't do much damage on BB. After some costly defeats like that, my opponent switched the heavy bombers to permanent AF/port pounding, and that allowed me to sneak again some convoys and FT TF in advanced bases (outside Avenger/Dauntless/Helldiver range). By the way I never went so far to have B-29 attacking my ships at 4000 feet.

(in reply to pauk)
Post #: 2619
RE: Nakajima C6N1-S Saiun "Myrt" - 7/3/2006 8:40:37 PM   
PzB74


Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline
Partly agree with you Pauk, but there have been so few 44-45 AAR games that new ground is ploughed
constantly. I think we should be brave enough to raise these issues and discuss them. Think I halted
all offensive actions in China voluentarily when I found that ground combat was biased towards Japan.

So I feel that I have the integrity that's needed to bring up issues that I think threatens playability.
Concerning stacking and air transport I feel that both sides have now gained benefits from its use and
that it's time to refine its use.

Andy has agreed on certain limitations on the amount of ac in a base and my air transport suggestion.
This does not apply for supply lifting though. He can also use 4E bombers in naval attacks, but no B-29s.

That is a good suggestion Admiral! I don't operate torpedo bombers from anything smaller than size 3 bases.
Must admit that I don't have controll over Army/Navy Base Force deployment. Will look into it.

_____________________________



"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to AmiralLaurent)
Post #: 2620
RE: Nakajima C6N1-S Saiun "Myrt" - 7/3/2006 9:02:58 PM   
PzB74


Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline
After I told Andy that I had spotted 857 ships in Kwajalein he admitted that he had plans for the Central Pacific:

For my next objective I strongly suspect you are now sitting waiting for me with all the troops ready and waiting .....
and they better be because I am bringing a BIG hammer on the assumption that you have heavily reinforced my preferred target !!!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With these words I suspect that a major offensive in the Central Pacific is only a few weeks or perhaps even days away.
Still got several troop convoys inbound to both Wake and the Marianas. Hopefully we can unload before the show begins, but preparations
have mostly been finished. A large Bde was unloaded at Bonin Island and another one is currently enroute for Iwo Jima - just in case.

Question: How big a hammer is needed to occupy a base with 70k supplies, 9 forts, 1250 assault points, heavy artillery, coastal
defenses, tank units and 5000 mines?

I will begin deployment of fighter ac to the PI, Home Islands, Bonins and Palaus immediately but keep the Marianas 'clean'. He's probably
going to nuke them with B-29s first. The hope is that large amounts of supplies and engineers will
keep the fields open. Expecting a prolonged battle this time.

There are some 750 Zekes in the pool with 615 arriving each month. Need the Frank asap! The KB will be used to ferry in CAP fighters, it's
still too weak to be a threat to the enemy monster fleet.


_____________________________



"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to PzB74)
Post #: 2621
RE: Nakajima C6N1-S Saiun "Myrt" - 7/3/2006 10:54:15 PM   
BLurking


Posts: 199
Joined: 3/24/2005
From: Frisco, TX
Status: offline
I'll be watching closely - 'cause I'm in the same spot as you. My defenses of the Marianas is pretty closely matched to what you've got, so it'll be interesting to see if you hold.

It's now 6/5/44 in my game, so if the hammer falls on me first I'll be sure to let you know how it goes .
My Frank research didn't pan out, so I've got another month to wait ...

(in reply to PzB74)
Post #: 2622
RE: Nakajima C6N1-S Saiun "Myrt" - 7/3/2006 10:57:27 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
The first time I see B29 bombing ships at sea in a PBEM of mine it will be the last turn played, that´s for sure.

(in reply to BLurking)
Post #: 2623
RE: Nakajima C6N1-S Saiun "Myrt" - 7/3/2006 10:59:06 PM   
BLurking


Posts: 199
Joined: 3/24/2005
From: Frisco, TX
Status: offline
Trust me - by the time the Allies get B-29s you'll have very little at sea worth sinking anyway .

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 2624
RE: Nakajima C6N1-S Saiun "Myrt" - 7/4/2006 12:31:14 AM   
1275psi

 

Posts: 7979
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
I am so glad that BZpanzer and myself have a stacking rule -number of airgroups cannot exceed airfield size, and CAP is max 40%.

I think we are going to have a far more realistic game (we are so far!)

I must tell him that though -B29s on anti shipping equals game kaput!

(in reply to BLurking)
Post #: 2625
Enemy convoy hit by Strike Force II - 7/4/2006 1:55:53 AM   
PzB74


Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline
Two major incidents this turn. Will cover them in two posts.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/21/44

Air Combat

I have been patroling the area between the Palaus and all the way down to Bougainville
with Strike Force II. Noticed more enemy convoys moving up a long the Eastern Coast of PNG.
So we moved back into the same old position 8 hexes NNE of Sarmi and delivered 2 punishing strikes
on an enemy troop/supply convoy! Enemy engineer and aviation units scrambled to their life rafts!

In all 4 of the transports that were hit in the Central Pacific sank.

Day Air attack on TF at 46,75

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zeke x 8
D4Y Judy x 20
B6N Jill x 23

Japanese aircraft losses
B6N Jill: 3 damaged

Allied Ships
AK Empire Rowan, Bomb hits 2, on fire
AK Empire Pibroch
AK Mabella, Bomb hits 3, on fire
AK Cape Isabel, Bomb hits 4, on fire, heavy damage
AK Cape Stevens
AK Needwood, Torpedo hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
LCVP 544F
AK Julia L. Dumont, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
LCM 544E, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
AK Shinkuang, Torpedo hits 1, on fire

Allied ground losses:
488 casualties reported
Vehicles lost 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 46,75

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zeke x 8
D4Y Judy x 17
B6N Jill x 19

Japanese aircraft losses
B6N Jill: 1 damaged

Allied Ships
AK Needwood, on fire, heavy damage
AK Idaho, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
AK Cape Isabel, Bomb hits 2, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
AK Mabella, on fire
DD Crane
LCVP 544F, Bomb hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
LCM 544C
AK B. Livingston, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage

Allied ground losses:
133 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Enemy Convoy hit!






Attachment (1)

_____________________________



"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to 1275psi)
Post #: 2626
RE: Enemy convoy hit by Strike Force II - 7/4/2006 2:05:41 AM   
PzB74


Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline
Yesterday one of our picket subs NNW of Eniwetok were hit by a Helldiver!
Most likely a carrier borne one as well. This was what triggered my immediate evacuation
of the Marianas. All shipping is steaming in the opposite direction and almost all
ac have evacuated to nearby bases.

I don't think this is an invasion, cause the enemy fleet that was spotted today had moved
5 hexes from the spot the sub was reported hit. Too fast in other words. Most likely a
strike force.

I've started to move air reserves towards the Home Islands, PI, Palaus and Bonins.
The newly restated KB has sortied with 54 crack George fighters aboard (on stand down).
They will be ferried to Bonin Island.

Strike Force I seems to be safe, no sign of the enemy - me thinks Andy gave up.
Can't beat the eternal bad weather up there.

Enemy Fleets Approaches the Marianas




Attachment (1)

_____________________________



"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to PzB74)
Post #: 2627
RE: Enemy convoy hit by Strike Force II - 7/4/2006 7:50:29 AM   
Fishbed

 

Posts: 1822
Joined: 11/21/2005
From: Beijing, China - Paris, France
Status: offline
Yes the best is still to leave the islands to the air crocodiles. No reason to oppose the Death Star now, let's them get bored over the islands while you strike his AKs somewhere else...
Even better if his aircrews get tired too early before the big show

(in reply to PzB74)
Post #: 2628
RE: Enemy convoy hit by Strike Force II - 7/4/2006 6:36:10 PM   
PzB74


Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/22/44

Bombardments

Escorts put on bombard? Ooops Andy!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Naval bombardment of Noemfoor, at 45,76 - Coastal Guns Fire Back!

51 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.
Allied Ships
DD Mahan
DD Cassin
DD Cummings, Shell hits 1
DD Shaw, Shell hits 13, on fire, heavy damage
DD Downes, Shell hits 1
DD Cushing
DD Norman
BB Idaho, Shell hits 4

Japanese ground losses:
13 casualties reported HAHAHA!

Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Air Combat

The Superforts hits Pagan...

Day Air attack on Pagan , at 64,62

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft
B-29 Superfortress x 57

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-43-IIa Oscar: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
B-29 Superfortress: 1 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
25 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

Airbase hits 3
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 21
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wake is also visited:

Day Air attack on Wake Island , at 82,63

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 6
A6M5 Zeke x 22

Allied aircraft
F-5C Lightning x 4
PB4Y Liberator x 3
B-24J Liberator x 17

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 1 destroyed
A6M5 Zeke: 3 destroyed, 7 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
F-5C Lightning: 1 destroyed
PB4Y Liberator: 2 damaged
B-24J Liberator: 5 damaged

Airbase hits 2
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Somehow all strikes from Kendari includes lots of fighters and just a few bombers
Still, the Corregidor is lost. Saw her yesterday and moved the Bettie's back in.

Day Air attack on TF at 33,74

Japanese aircraft
G4M2 Betty x 13
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 74

Japanese aircraft losses
G4M2 Betty: 4 damaged

Allied Ships
CVE Corregidor, Torpedo hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems like I guessed right! Pagan is hit again, by carrier bombers this time.
Good thing we got the crack Imp Division ashore in time!

Day Air attack on Pagan , at 64,62

Allied aircraft
SB2C Helldiver x 29

Allied aircraft losses
SB2C Helldiver: 1 destroyed, 4 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
64 casualties reported

Airbase hits 1
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 7

Aircraft Attacking:
28 x SB2C Helldiver bombing at 2000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Pagan , at 64,62

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft
F6F Hellcat x 12
SB2C Helldiver x 109

Japanese aircraft losses
No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
SB2C Helldiver: 2 destroyed, 12 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
155 casualties reported
Guns lost 2

Airbase hits 4
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 43
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground Combat

Noemfoor is still a pike in Andy's side
He thought I airlifted 8" guns in...only a few 150mm howitzers
and 5.5" coastal defence guns.

Ground combat at Noemfoor

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 35930 troops, 315 guns, 85 vehicles, Assault Value = 822

Defending force 30210 troops, 201 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 576

Allied max assault: 1594 - adjusted assault: 793

Japanese max defense: 403 - adjusted defense: 1405

Allied assault odds: 0 to 1 (fort level 8)

Japanese ground losses:
262 casualties reported
Guns lost 6

Allied ground losses:
1436 casualties reported
Guns lost 48
Vehicles lost 4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Enemy Strikes on Pagan!

This will be interesting. Enemy fleets spotted in Kwajalein and carriers near Saipan.
The last division sent to the Marianas will dock in the Bonins if the yank farms stick
around. A strategic reserve is always usefull.

All islands in the Palaus now got between 1200 and 1450 AP. Pagan got 2k mines, the rest
between 4-5k. How more ready can we be?






Attachment (1)

_____________________________



"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to Fishbed)
Post #: 2629
RE: Enemy convoy hit by Strike Force II - 7/4/2006 6:46:43 PM   
Sneer


Posts: 2654
Joined: 10/29/2003
Status: offline
did you agree on jacks/georges/corsair on desks of laptops 

_____________________________


(in reply to PzB74)
Post #: 2630
RE: Enemy convoy hit by Strike Force II - 7/4/2006 6:55:49 PM   
PzB74


Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline
Laptops? No, but we got rules for flattops
Andy tells me that his latest US farms arrive with Corsairs...so that's it folks
I don't use George/Jack on my farms, but will shuttle them to/from the battle zones.


_____________________________



"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to Sneer)
Post #: 2631
RE: Enemy convoy hit by Strike Force II - 7/4/2006 8:15:52 PM   
AmiralLaurent

 

Posts: 3351
Joined: 3/11/2003
From: Near Paris, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PzB

Laptops? No, but we got rules for flattops
Andy tells me that his latest US farms arrive with Corsairs...so that's it folks
I don't use George/Jack on my farms, but will shuttle them to/from the battle zones.



Well, Corsairs were used from US and British CV so it should be possible. Just in WITP there should be an earlier type of Corsair, that is not carrier capable, and then a carrier-capable version (in 1944).

Georges and Jacks were never used from CVs, but I am not able to say if they were able to do it.

PzB, I love your plan. It reminds me of the Sho Japanese battle plan for the PI in 1944, so don't make the same mistake: don't try to attack US CVs.
Your chance will be to disable enough the attacking forces so the attacked island will held. The key of the success is supplies, and it is a good thing you have brought 160k before the rook fall... Just curious, can you say us how many supplies are in each of the four islands ?

One flaw I see with this plan is that you will have to base your AC on the Mariannas themselves. And that as soon will move your AC there, the airfield sign will become red, and Andy has just to wait for that to order his BBs to pound your airfields.
So if you have useless planes (Ki-48 and so on), my advice would be to move them quick there, just to draw Allied BBs. After the first bombardment, BB are far less powerful (or do Allied AE allready allow shell replenishment at sea?) and so your real strike force will have reduced ground losses.

(in reply to PzB74)
Post #: 2632
RE: Enemy convoy hit by Strike Force II - 7/4/2006 8:21:25 PM   
FeurerKrieg


Posts: 3397
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Denver, CO
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent


So if you have useless planes (Ki-48 and so on), my advice would be to move them quick there, just to draw Allied BBs. After the first bombardment, BB are far less powerful (or do Allied AE allready allow shell replenishment at sea?) and so your real strike force will have reduced ground losses.



I don't think Allied AE can replenish at sea until 45.

_____________________________


Upper portion used with permission of www.subart.net, copyright John Meeks

(in reply to AmiralLaurent)
Post #: 2633
RE: Enemy convoy hit by Strike Force II - 7/4/2006 8:51:56 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Feurer Krieg


quote:

ORIGINAL: AmiralLaurent


So if you have useless planes (Ki-48 and so on), my advice would be to move them quick there, just to draw Allied BBs. After the first bombardment, BB are far less powerful (or do Allied AE allready allow shell replenishment at sea?) and so your real strike force will have reduced ground losses.



I don't think Allied AE can replenish at sea until 45.



I think they will never replenish heavy shells at sea.

(in reply to FeurerKrieg)
Post #: 2634
RE: Enemy convoy hit by Strike Force II - 7/4/2006 9:33:14 PM   
Sneer


Posts: 2654
Joined: 10/29/2003
Status: offline
i think that 5" shells in 45y only

_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 2635
RE: Enemy convoy hit by Strike Force II - 7/4/2006 9:42:07 PM   
Honda


Posts: 953
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Karlovac, Croatia
Status: offline
His CVs are probably on a raid mode. When they get past the Marianas you'll start to feel the "enemy CVs are now beyond the Marianas" paranoia. Make sure your KB leftovers are safe. Hide everything. Where, I don't know. Maybe scattering can do you some good. While accepting losses, you still don't hold all your eggs in one basket. It's also possible he's going for a location where he saw your CVs based from a SigInt report. Prepare for the worst. When you see the transports coming, man the airfields on Marianas but only with fighters. Not a single bomber - they'll just pull along the fighters to be eaten by CAP. By CAPing yourself, you can inflict some losses to his fighter force, possiblly enough to go for the CVs. The invasion can be left to get bogged down on the beaches. Patience is the mothers of success here.

_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 2636
Enemy Deep Strike Carrier Missions! - 7/4/2006 10:27:36 PM   
PzB74


Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline
You were right Honda! Andy fanned his carriers out at full speed in 3 different directions.
Some 20 transports and escorts were hit. Nothing valuable though and this is the price I have
to pay for messing up with the KB

This strike will cost us many ships, but it also means that we got more time to prepare for
an invasion. Strike Force I has almost reached Japan and will join the Combined Fleet together
with a new carrier in a weeks time. In 3 weeks the Kaga and Taiho will become operational again.

I've moved hundreds of ac forward and I don't think Andy will dare to send a single Carrier TF
towards Naha or the Home Islands. Most likely he will buzz around and sink another 20 transports.
Since he probably got a powerful CAP setting I've prepped a little trap for him at Bonin Island.
The crack George's and 150 other fighters are ready for the enemy.

Thx A.Laurent! I think my plan is quite flexible. The Combined fleet will pose a threat to
the enemy if we can weaken them. Imagine sending 9 battelships, 20 cruisers and 50 destroyers into
the invasion beaches The enemy will have to face 5k mines, I doubt Andy is very keen on bombarding.
One of the islands even got 240mm howitzers

Still, I will follow the CAP and defend plan as outlined here on the forum. Each base got between 62 and
75k supplies. This will be exciting....the mother of all battles may be right around the corner!

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/23/44

Air Combat

The B-29's can not close Pagan alone!

Day Air attack on Pagan , at 64,62

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft
B-29 Superfortress x 43

Japanese aircraft losses
No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
B-29 Superfortress: 2 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
13 casualties reported

Airbase hits 4
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 48
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Put the crack 54 ac George unit on Iwo Jima at 10% CAP. Don't want to expend it yet.
Still, one of 3 ac calimed at Hellcat.

The convoy at Iwo Jima had unloaded all but a few support squads. Sad for the ships,
but the Brigade was saved....

Day Air attack on TF, near Iwo Jima at 63,53

Japanese aircraft
N1K1-J George x 3
Ki-43-IIa Oscar x 25

Allied aircraft
F6F Hellcat x 27
SB2C Helldiver x 44
TBM Avenger x 23

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-43-IIa Oscar: 12 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F6F Hellcat: 1 destroyed
SB2C Helldiver: 3 damaged

Japanese Ships
AP Shuko Maru, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
AP Rakuyo Maru, Bomb hits 1, on fire
AP Nichibi Maru, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
AP Tenran Maru, Bomb hits 3, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
MSW W.30, Bomb hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
MSW W.9, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
AP Tenryu Maru, Bomb hits 7, on fire, heavy damage
AP Tenzan Maru, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
AP Taganoura Maru

Japanese ground losses:
19 casualties reported
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The large cargo and troop convoys that just unloaded the Imp Div and 170k supplies
were caught in the open and 3 escorts, 3 transports and 10 cargo ships were hit.

MSW Wa 103, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
PC PC-20, Bomb hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
PC Fukue, Bomb hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
AK Juyo Maru, Bomb hits 10, on fire, heavy damage
AK Taikei Maru, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
AK Oita Maru, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
AK Shinfuku Maru, Bomb hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
AK Reikai Maru, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
AK Yasushima Maru, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
AK Narita Maru, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
AK Gozan Maru, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
AK Italy Maru, Bomb hits 5, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
AK Horaizan Maru, Bomb hits 9, on fire, heavy damage
AP Ayaha Maru, Bomb hits 8, on fire, heavy damage
AP Bokuyo Maru, Bomb hits 1, on fire
AP Arabia Maru, Bomb hits 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Enemy Carrier Strikes!

The strikes were devastating, but we got hundreds of spare cargo ships. More will sink,
and my only worry is that the troop ships that are trying to escape will get sunk




Attachment (1)

_____________________________



"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to Honda)
Post #: 2637
RE: Enemy Deep Strike Carrier Missions! - 7/5/2006 12:05:48 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
How did you get 240mm howitzers to the Marianas? I thought those CD units are all static.

(in reply to PzB74)
Post #: 2638
RE: Enemy Deep Strike Carrier Missions! - 7/5/2006 12:10:53 AM   
PzB74


Posts: 5076
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline
There's a big super heavy Artillery Brigade in China with 24x240mm and 36x150 mm guns 



_____________________________



"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without"
- Dwight D. Eisenhower

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 2639
RE: Enemy Deep Strike Carrier Missions! - 7/5/2006 12:35:05 AM   
1275psi

 

Posts: 7979
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
PZB
I have been mucking around with the Siapan Scenerio against AI, testing
have been able to get the battle fleet to strike the invasion fleet several times

To sum up - 5 BBs, 8CAs, 10 DDs hit the invasion fleet
Result - 7 or 8 transports hit/sunk, 6 or seven DDs sunk
Many japanese ships crippled, many japanese ships do not engage!

Try again -breaking the final thrust into multiple TFs -and I get multiple engagements -all ships fire -actually engaged Many CVEs.

Would highly recommend if you have time some testing, BIG battle groups are not necessarily the best way to go.

(in reply to PzB74)
Post #: 2640
Page:   <<   < prev  86 87 [88] 89 90   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> After Action Reports >> RE: Nakajima C6N1-S Saiun "Myrt" Page: <<   < prev  86 87 [88] 89 90   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

2.641