Rise of the Sheep! JocMeister(A) vs. Obvert(J)

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Encircled
Posts: 2095
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 3:50 pm
Location: Northern England

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by Encircled »

Congratulations

Wish you hadn't posted that Civ link. I'm tempted all over again now!
User avatar
DOCUP
Posts: 3091
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 7:38 pm

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by DOCUP »

Congrats Joc. In Civ who do you all like to play as?
princep01
Posts: 943
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 10:02 pm
Location: Texas

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by princep01 »

Encircled, I am laughed out loud at your post. I am in the very same boat with you. All the CIV talk really made me look at those prized games again. For those of you voting CIV 4 w/ mods as the best of the lot....I agree.

Joc, congrats regarding tying the knot. I wish you the happiness and fulfilment of family life for many, many years to come. Your family and professional advances have been quite significant this year. Perhaps we should all declare it the Year of the Joc. Live long and prosper as I heard a sage, if vaguely alien, man once say.
User avatar
CaptBeefheart
Posts: 2513
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2003 2:42 am
Location: Seoul, Korea

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by CaptBeefheart »

Further congratulations on making if official! Also, Matrix seems pretty cool with talk of other games. They know we have to do something else once in a while and that we always come back.

Cheers,
CC
Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by JocMeister »

Thanks guys! [&o]

Good thing CIV5 got me hooked. My other game is on hold as well. I thought I ask here if anyone can shed any light on this:

Its 1/43. My opponent has HEAVILY overstacked with almost 100.000 troops in the hex prior to the attack. So almost 4x over the SL limit. This is subject to FOW obviously. Terrain is mountain (x3), my troops were just under the 25.000 limit and had about 50% supply. All Corps had level 2 forts except one that had only level 1.

My opponent doesn´t like the (-) disruption and is afraid it has something unforeseen consequence of using Stacking Limits. Personally I think he took a beating trying to bring the forts down and that caused the negative modifier. I´ve seen that a lot in this game fighting in Burma. The combat engineers take a tremendous beating trying to bring down the fort in heavy terrain. And if there are no combat engineers...

This attack matches my experience when fighting in Burma in x3 terrain against dug in troops. And I was doing that with allied 43/44 squads backed up by 1000 4Es, heavy armor and loads of combat engineers.

Anyone else finding something odd in the CR that I´m missing?
Ground combat at 70,48 (near Kunming)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 64044 troops, 628 guns, 195 vehicles, Assault Value = 2237

Defending force 20826 troops, 85 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 737

Japanese adjusted assault: 655

Allied adjusted defense: 565

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 1

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

Japanese ground losses:
4223 casualties reported
Squads: 239 destroyed, 232 disabled
Non Combat: 29 destroyed, 24 disabled
Engineers: 24 destroyed, 23 disabled
Guns lost 84 (46 destroyed, 38 disabled)
Vehicles lost 7 (4 destroyed, 3 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
384 casualties reported
Squads: 5 destroyed, 105 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 19 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 6 (2 destroyed, 4 disabled)

Assaulting units:
22nd Division
6th Division
15th Division
34th Division
104th Division
2nd Ind. Mountain Gun Regiment
4th Mortar Battalion
10th Ind. Mountain Gun Regiment
23rd Army
11th Army
20th Ind. Mtn Gun Battalion

Defending units:
50th Chinese Corps
40th Chinese Corps
54th Chinese Corps
7th Group Army
7th War Area
3rd Heavy Mortar Regiment


Image
User avatar
Captain Cruft
Posts: 3636
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: England

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by Captain Cruft »

Over-stacking is supposed to cause disruption. I can't see what the problem is frankly.
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

I believe it was said somewhere in the forum this week, and I think it is true, that only one LCU has to be disrupted (or out of supply, etc.) to get the (-) sign. Not the whole stack.

I wouldn't find these results remarkable at all given the terrain, that you are in at least partial supply, and the forts, coupled with his lack of dedicated engineers.
The Moose
User avatar
Kereguelen
Posts: 1454
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 9:08 pm

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by Kereguelen »

Nothing odd. As far as I can tell, this is no unforeseen consequence of Stacking Limits but the way they are intended to work. Disruption is ostensibly simply too high for attacker which led to the negative disruption modifier. I have seen similar results in atoll combats since AE came out. The problem for the attacker is that he cannot reduce the disruption of his troops while having massively overstacked (I assume that he has been in the hex for some time and disruptions adds 1-5 point for every unit every turn).
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by JocMeister »

Thanks for the info guys. I doubt michealm will even look at this. Hopefully we can get started soon again!
Image
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by witpqs »

Peek back at the query in tech support, it was answered by JWE with a manual section reference. It seems that the earlier understanding had missed the fact that WAD for all stacking includes a minor disruption and minor fatigue penalty. The operative notion is that the optional, all-hex stacking limits work the same as the original atoll/island stacking. It's just that 99% of us overlooked the paragraph in the manual where it notes the small disruption and fatigue effects.
poodlebrain
Posts: 392
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 4:14 pm
Location: Comfy Chair in Baton Rouge

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by poodlebrain »

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Thanks guys! [&o]

Good thing CIV5 got me hooked. My other game is on hold as well. I thought I ask here if anyone can shed any light on this:

Its 1/43. My opponent has HEAVILY overstacked with almost 100.000 troops in the hex prior to the attack. So almost 4x over the SL limit. This is subject to FOW obviously. Terrain is mountain (x3), my troops were just under the 25.000 limit and had about 50% supply. All Corps had level 2 forts except one that had only level 1.

My opponent doesn´t like the (-) disruption and is afraid it has something unforeseen consequence of using Stacking Limits. Personally I think he took a beating trying to bring the forts down and that caused the negative modifier. I´ve seen that a lot in this game fighting in Burma. The combat engineers take a tremendous beating trying to bring down the fort in heavy terrain. And if there are no combat engineers...

This attack matches my experience when fighting in Burma in x3 terrain against dug in troops. And I was doing that with allied 43/44 squads backed up by 1000 4Es, heavy armor and loads of combat engineers.

Anyone else finding something odd in the CR that I´m missing?
Ground combat at 70,48 (near Kunming)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 64044 troops, 628 guns, 195 vehicles, Assault Value = 2237

Defending force 20826 troops, 85 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 737

Japanese adjusted assault: 655

Allied adjusted defense: 565

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 1

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

Japanese ground losses:
4223 casualties reported
Squads: 239 destroyed, 232 disabled
Non Combat: 29 destroyed, 24 disabled
Engineers: 24 destroyed, 23 disabled
Guns lost 84 (46 destroyed, 38 disabled)
Vehicles lost 7 (4 destroyed, 3 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
384 casualties reported
Squads: 5 destroyed, 105 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 19 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 6 (2 destroyed, 4 disabled)

Assaulting units:
22nd Division
6th Division
15th Division
34th Division
104th Division
2nd Ind. Mountain Gun Regiment
4th Mortar Battalion
10th Ind. Mountain Gun Regiment
23rd Army
11th Army
20th Ind. Mtn Gun Battalion

Defending units:
50th Chinese Corps
40th Chinese Corps
54th Chinese Corps
7th Group Army
7th War Area
3rd Heavy Mortar Regiment


Let's apply Occam's Razor. All those units told to attack do so. Command, control and communications are overwhelmed by the volume of troops. Once attack begins leaders cannot maintain control to prevent or limit losses
where defenses cannot be overcome.

In essence the game treats the ground combat like a WWI battle. Attacker suffers huge losses without achieving breakthrough.
Never trust a man who's ass is wider than his shoulders.
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by JocMeister »

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Peek back at the query in tech support, it was answered by JWE with a manual section reference. It seems that the earlier understanding had missed the fact that WAD for all stacking includes a minor disruption and minor fatigue penalty. The operative notion is that the optional, all-hex stacking limits work the same as the original atoll/island stacking. It's just that 99% of us overlooked the paragraph in the manual where it notes the small disruption and fatigue effects.

Just saw it. Pretty cool and makes me like SL more. If its not only about supply it might make it harder to push past the SL limits in great numbers. I was kind of worried as the allied I could largely just ignore it!

Hopefully I´ll get the turn back soon.
Image
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by JocMeister »

Just finished my CIV5 game. I promised myself I wouldn´t start a new one straight away..but I did! [:D]

On a more game related note I also managed to set up a sandbox to try MAN/HI bombings. Results should be ready in a couple of days.
Image
Speedysteve
Posts: 15974
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Reading, England

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by Speedysteve »

Congrats on the marriage Jocke [:)]
WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by JocMeister »

Thanks Speedy! [:)]
Image
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by JocMeister »

Erik should be back tonight but I don´t know if he will have time to do the turn. Had to go back and read my own AAR to remember what happened last turn! [:D]
Image
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by JocMeister »

Erik got hit with a massive delay coming home yesterday but we should be back on track starting today! [:)]
Image
User avatar
catwhoorg
Posts: 686
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:47 pm
Location: Uk expat lving near Atlanta

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by catwhoorg »

Yay. Next stop Tokyo...

That is the target of your super secret last major mission right ?
[:'(]
Image
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by JocMeister »

Of course! [:D]
Image
JocMeister
Posts: 8258
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:03 am
Location: Sweden

RE: Battle for Korea

Post by JocMeister »

[font="Verdana"]11th June -45[/font]
______________________________________________________________________________

Almost forgot how to do these things! [:D]

------------------------
Korea
------------------------

The Gunzan troops shifted one hex closer and should arrive in 2 days. Will be interesting to see what Erik has here. Its a clear hex and should spell doom for any Japanese defenders depending on forts at Gunzan. I´m too light on Arty and have only the embedded combat engineers but have all the US armor...could be very interesting.

At Masan we launched the first bombardment in a long while. We get a very good result here. Not sure if its the forts we built or if Eriks troops have so little supply they wont counter fire at all. If I would take a guess I would say bringing in 22 divisions worth of troops backed up by 20 Artillery units in a single hex probably was a "tad" too much for the Japanese supply system to cope with. That is more then the SWPAC/SOPAC/CENTPAC commands combined. In perspective to the Japanese forces I have 14 IDs in China and I have dumped 2,5 million supply there in 3 months. Will be very interesting to see what I will find at Gunzan. Knowing Erik there is a good chance I will find the rest of the Manchuria garrison there. If so he has left it completely empty.

Included the full CR so you can see what kind of troops he has in place.
Ground combat at Masan (102,54)

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 70054 troops, 1515 guns, 1292 vehicles, Assault Value = 2645

Defending force 187909 troops, 2345 guns, 567 vehicles, Assault Value = 6522

Japanese ground losses:
253 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 21 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled


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


Assaulting units:
33rd Infantry Division
6th Marine Division
Americal Infantry Division
2nd Marine Division
34th Combat Engineer Regiment
81st Infantry Division
3rd Marine Division
XXIV CorpsArtillery
147th Field Artillery Regiment
X US Corps
1st USMC Field Artillery Battalion
X Corps Artillery
Tenth US Army
251st Field Artillery Battalion
4th USMC Field Artillery Battalion
XXIV US Corps
V US Amphib Corps
8th USMC Field Artillery Battalion
I Corps Artillery
I US Corps
12th USMC Field Artillery Battalion
3rd USMC Field Artillery Battalion
XIV Corps Artillery
10th USMC Field Artillery Battalion
148th Field Artillery Battalion


Defending units:
120th Division
77th Infantry Regiment
16th Garrison Unit
150th Division
140th Infantry Regiment
11th Division
19th Division
68th Brigade
105th Ind.Mixed Brigade
112th Division
78th Infantry Regiment
87th Infantry Regiment
123rd Division
109th Division
57th Division
30th Infantry Regiment
127th Division
4th Manchukuo Distr Division
8th Division
105th Division
160th Division
111th Division
96th Division
14th Division
94th Division
122nd Division
Yosu Fortress
71st Mountain Gun Regiment
2nd Mortar Regiment
15th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
6th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
17th Mortar Battalion
22nd Medium Field Artillery Regiment
7th Ind.Hvy.Art. Battalion
28th Mountain Gun Regiment
34th Army
12th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
29th RF Gun Battalion
11th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
2nd Medium Field Artillery Regiment
Tonei Hvy Gun Regiment
14th Area Army
5th Medium Field Artillery Regiment
26th Field Artillery Regiment
31st RF Gun Battalion
13th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
30th RF Gun Battalion
10th Mortar Battalion


------------------------
China
------------------------

We continue to chalk up successes here with the fall of Changsha! [&o]
Ground combat at Changsha (82,52)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 60859 troops, 1027 guns, 2246 vehicles, Assault Value = 2704

Defending force 28419 troops, 280 guns, 31 vehicles, Assault Value = 558

Allied engineers reduce fortifications to 3

Allied adjusted assault: 2083

Japanese adjusted defense: 285

Allied assault odds: 7 to 1 (fort level 3)

Allied forces CAPTURE Changsha !!!

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-46-III Dinah: 4 destroyed

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

Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
9629 casualties reported
Squads: 254 destroyed, 3 disabled
Non Combat: 465 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 70 destroyed, 2 disabled
Guns lost 127 (127 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Vehicles lost 24 (24 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Units retreated 10


Allied ground losses:
658 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 104 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 32 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 12 disabled
Vehicles lost 33 (2 destroyed, 31 disabled)


Assaulting units:
Guides Cavalry Regiment
Provisionl Tank Brigade
50th Tank Brigade
254th Armoured Brigade
Gardner's Horse Regiment
3rd Cavalry Regiment
19th Motorised Division
6th Australian Division
18th Cavalry Regiment
17th Motorised Division
255th Indian Tank Brigade
11th PAVO Regiment
9th Australian Division
14th Army
2/9th Field Regiment
2/11th Field Regiment
2/13th Field Regiment


Defending units:
65th Brigade
63rd Division
32nd Division
5th Ind.Mixed Brigade
51st Division
58th Infantry Regiment
13th RGC Temp./B Division
35th Division
56th Const Co
8th Ind. Field Artillery Battalion
54th JAAF AF Bn

The trapped Canton/HK stack continue to take a pounding from ground bombardments. I will try an attack here in a couple of days.
Ground combat at 81,55 (near Pingsiang)

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 4110 troops, 270 guns, 306 vehicles, Assault Value = 2100

Defending force 125751 troops, 1221 guns, 692 vehicles, Assault Value = 3557

Japanese ground losses:
551 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 33 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 6 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 10 disabled
Guns lost 5 (1 destroyed, 4 disabled)


------------------------
Home Islands
------------------------

The bombers rest today but fighters sweep in over Kyushu.
Morning Air attack on Kumamoto , at 102,59

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid detected at 17 NM, estimated altitude 36,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 6 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5b Zero x 7
A6M8 Zero x 7
A7M2 Sam x 17
J2M5 Jack x 8
N1K2-J George x 10
Ki-43-IV Oscar x 5
Ki-84r Frank x 12
Ki-100-I Tony x 11


Allied aircraft
F4U-1D Corsair x 41

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5b Zero: 2 destroyed
A6M8 Zero: 3 destroyed
A7M2 Sam: 1 destroyed
N1K2-J George: 1 destroyed
Ki-43-IV Oscar: 1 destroyed
Ki-84r Frank: 1 destroyed
Ki-100-I Tony: 2 destroyed


Allied aircraft losses
F4U-1D Corsair: 1 destroyed

All in all about 8 sweeps go in shooting down 36 planes for 16 own losses. More sweeps are ordered for tomorrow.

------------------------
The Fleet
------------------------

Reached Naha last turn. If spent over two hours just clicking to get the air groups sorted and new pilots into place. Yuck. Hopefully the last time we will have to do that...I will need 7-10 days before heading back in again. This time with BFs for Saishu To.

Once replenished we can still field 2000 CV aircraft. A little bit less then I had anticipated but this will slowly grow as CVs/CVLs/CVEs get repaired at Manila.

CV Shangri-La will be back in 34 days. CVL Cowpens and 3 CVEs within the week. CV Antietam is 3 weeks from the area. Another 10 CVEs should be back within 60 days. I also get a batch of British CVLs and CVEs in a couple of days. CV Boxer and CV Kearsarge is less then 2 months out.

So its looking pretty good. KB might still pack a small punch but nothing that can stop us from keeping the LOC to Korea open.


Image
Attachments
Korea19.jpg
Korea19.jpg (735.65 KiB) Viewed 59 times
Image
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”