The Bitter End - Topeverest (A) vs Admiral Kamikaze (E)

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

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

Post Reply
User avatar
HansBolter
Posts: 7191
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: United States

RE: Dec 17, 1944 - large naval battle sequence

Post by HansBolter »

ORIGINAL: topeverest

Not sure what you mean. Should I be using it or him?

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

one acronym........LRCAP

You.

The LRCP will follow your TF to the full extent of its range, albeit with diminishing effectiveness.

This provides cover outside the 3 hex range of normal CAP.
Hans

User avatar
topeverest
Posts: 3376
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
Location: Houston, TX - USA

RE: Dec 17, 1944 - large naval battle sequence

Post by topeverest »

Ironically, all these years I've been playing I tend not to use LRCAP on CV's. I do use it in LBA all the time.
Does it really work out that far on CV's to any effect?

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

ORIGINAL: topeverest

Not sure what you mean. Should I be using it or him?

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

one acronym........LRCAP

You.

The LRCP will follow your TF to the full extent of its range, albeit with diminishing effectiveness.

This provides cover outside the 3 hex range of normal CAP.
Andy M
User avatar
topeverest
Posts: 3376
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
Location: Houston, TX - USA

RE: Dec 17, 1944 - large naval battle sequence

Post by topeverest »

Thanks,

But we both know how hard it is to play the empire in late war. My hat it tipped to Admiral Kamikaze for his aggressive
style that keeps me very honest. That said, I agree that it was a low solution gambit on the empire's part.

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

WOW! That was one horrific slaughter for the IJN! Six BBs and 2 CAs sunk and one more BB certain to follow! The Japanese
SC superiority just disappeared. You may have been lucky on your mistake, but he made a really big one, knowing you had your
buzz saw in the area. Well done! [&o][&o]


Image
Andy M
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 19745
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: Dec 17, 1944 - large naval battle sequence

Post by BBfanboy »

Had another look at the combat reports from Dec. 16. There are a lot of A6M5 Zeros in the Townsville attack and not many in the BB CAP.
Makes me think he set a lot of them to LRCAP the BBs but the AI decided to escort the bombers instead. Nasty turn of luck if that is what happened.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
topeverest
Posts: 3376
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
Location: Houston, TX - USA

RE: Dec 18, 1944 - All Quiet

Post by topeverest »

Both sides appear to have had enough excitement for the time being. Note that Townsville is about to become a level 9 base.

Aside - gotta love level 9's because in our house rules, I need a level 9 to launch attack missions for 4E's. The 29's will do nicely a I bring them in over the next days.

Image
Attachments
all quiet.jpg
all quiet.jpg (350.79 KiB) Viewed 76 times
Andy M
User avatar
topeverest
Posts: 3376
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
Location: Houston, TX - USA

RE: Dec 18, 1944 - net installment to Oz

Post by topeverest »

Fleet should be aggregated by next turn at New Caledonia / Koumac. This will be the force that strikes south to Brisbane. note I am planning to land at townsville and move, as I don't want to consume AV in an amphibious invasion. What I am landing is more than strong enough to get to Brisbane in 2 months.

Image
Attachments
hh.jpg
hh.jpg (253.47 KiB) Viewed 76 times
Andy M
User avatar
topeverest
Posts: 3376
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
Location: Houston, TX - USA

RE: Dec 18, 1944 - world map

Post by topeverest »

following is a world map. The allies have concentrated all major combat efforts to secure the foothold in Oz. By the end of January, I will drop 2 more troop loads in Oz as described in the map, and then I will turn my transport power to move troops at Hawaii to Oz for staging. My next major amphibious offensive other than Oz probably wont be until about March.

I am open to other thoughts, keeping in mind our house rule that I have to take back oz (Sydney Melboure and Brisbane before going to the inner ring assets.

Image
Attachments
world map.jpg
world map.jpg (306.43 KiB) Viewed 76 times
Andy M
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Dec 18, 1944 - All Quiet

Post by witpqs »

Aside - gotta love level 9's because in our house rules, I need a level 9 to launch attack missions for 4E's.

Are you kidding? [X(]
User avatar
topeverest
Posts: 3376
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
Location: Houston, TX - USA

RE: Dec 18, 1944 - All Quiet

Post by topeverest »

True,

But we upgraded SPS's across the map so that most whole land hex bases can make it to 6. We also added bases in gap areas
It works out OK, but it has the effect of slowing down the allied punch to a material degree. Empire has time to engage in operations to try
to thwart the 4e steamroller.

ORIGINAL: witpqs
Aside - gotta love level 9's because in our house rules, I need a level 9 to launch attack missions for 4E's.

Are you kidding? [X(]
Andy M
User avatar
topeverest
Posts: 3376
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
Location: Houston, TX - USA

RE: Dec 22, 1944 - Monthly sub losses

Post by topeverest »

This is the part of the war the empire is doing the best. of course, late war empire ASW makes allied subs pay for kills.

Allied sub killed 10

empire kills - 20
E - 4
AP - 3
AK - 4
AKL - 2
TK - 4 (including 2 large)
AO - 1 (large)
SC - 2

damaged ships some of which will have sunk 17

I am keeping up the sub war and will burn my sub assets despite the loss ratio. I am staying at least 4 hexes out from Japan and can not longer interdict Fusan link, but I am getting losses at about 2 to 1. If it drops to one to one, I will have to change tactics.

As far as how those 10 subs have been lost, there is a definitive pattern. At Tsushima, at Rabaul, at Balikpapan, At Singapore. But I also am losing subs out in the deep. empire DD's are becoming quite effective in getting subs. my solution is to put two subs in each task force, and typically when one sub is hammered, the other gets an attack.
Andy M
User avatar
topeverest
Posts: 3376
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
Location: Houston, TX - USA

RE: Dec 22, 1944 - Net load to townsville

Post by topeverest »

Here is the skinny on the next load...arrive in two game days, but doesn't look like it will be contested.

Image
Attachments
22.jpg
22.jpg (253.74 KiB) Viewed 76 times
Andy M
User avatar
topeverest
Posts: 3376
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
Location: Houston, TX - USA

RE: Dec 22, 1944 -Air raid on Cairns

Post by topeverest »

Empire pulled off a pretty successful CAP defense of CAIRNS this past turn. Saw some new things and I am scratching my head a bit. escorts were bypassed even though they weren't outnumbered.

This is one of those raids. Keep in mind I swept with two squadrons too. Pretty amazing given the pounding he has taken. I wonder how he did it, because I don't think it was luck.

I cant believe it was the initial bounce from 22K

orning Air attack on Cairns , at 92,140

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid spotted at 36 NM, estimated altitude 16,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 15 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5c Zero x 13
J2M5 Jack x 2
N1K2-J George x 13

Allied aircraft
F4U-1A Corsair x 24
SB2C-3 Helldiver x 59
TBM-1C Avenger x 57

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5c Zero: 1 destroyed, 1 damaged
A6M5c Zero: 1 destroyed on ground
J2M5 Jack: 1 destroyed
N1K2-J George: 13 damaged
N1K2-J George: 2 destroyed on ground

Allied aircraft losses
SB2C-3 Helldiver: 3 destroyed, 3 damaged
SB2C-3 Helldiver: 1 destroyed by flak
TBM-1C Avenger: 3 destroyed, 2 damaged

Japanese Ships
MTB G-884, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk

Japanese ground losses:
6 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Airbase hits 7
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 11
Port hits 11
Port fuel hits 2

Aircraft Attacking:
22 x SB2C-3 Helldiver releasing from 3000'
Port Attack: 1 x 1000 lb GP Bomb, 2 x 250 lb GP Bomb
52 x TBM-1C Avenger bombing from 11000 feet
Airfield Attack: 2 x 500 lb GP Bomb
29 x SB2C-3 Helldiver releasing from 2000'
Port Attack: 1 x 1000 lb GP Bomb, 2 x 250 lb GP Bomb
3 x SB2C-3 Helldiver releasing from 4000'
Port Attack: 1 x 1000 lb GP Bomb, 2 x 250 lb GP Bomb

CAP engaged:
Chiyoda-1 with A6M5c Zero (2 airborne, 0 on standby, 2 scrambling)
2 plane(s) intercepting now.
2 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 22000 , scrambling fighters between 11000 and 24000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 37 minutes
2 planes vectored on to bombers
19th Ku S-1 with N1K2-J George (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
1 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 5 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 22000 , scrambling fighters to 11000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 28 minutes
6 planes vectored on to bombers
32nd Ku S-1 with N1K2-J George (2 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
2 plane(s) intercepting now.
2 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 0 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 22000 , scrambling fighters to 11000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 15 minutes
4 planes vectored on to bombers
345 Ku S-2 with N1K2-J George (0 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 3 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 22000
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 25 minutes
3 planes vectored on to bombers
S-351 Hikotai with A6M5c Zero (1 airborne, 0 on standby, 5 scrambling)
1 plane(s) intercepting now.
0 plane(s) not yet engaged, 0 being recalled, 1 out of immediate contact.
Group patrol altitude is 22000 , scrambling fighters between 11000 and 25000.
Time for all group planes to reach interception is 32 minutes
7 planes vectored on to bombers
24th Ku S-1 with J2M5 Jack (2 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
2 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 22000
Raid is overhead

Andy M
User avatar
topeverest
Posts: 3376
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
Location: Houston, TX - USA

RE: Dec 22, 1944 -Losses

Post by topeverest »

I feel like there is something else that describes his victory and I am not getting it. here are losses for entire day. 1 to 1 and I didn't have a sub in the attack hex, so lost a good number of pilots...oh well.



Image
Attachments
hh.jpg
hh.jpg (107.38 KiB) Viewed 76 times
Andy M
User avatar
topeverest
Posts: 3376
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
Location: Houston, TX - USA

RE: Dec 22, 1944 -Losses

Post by topeverest »

I guess I am going to have to sweep the hell out of these bases.
Andy M
User avatar
topeverest
Posts: 3376
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
Location: Houston, TX - USA

Dec 26, 1944 - second load at Townsville

Post by topeverest »

The last few turns have been pretty uneventful. The allies pushed another large load of troops to Townsville and have generally expanded the foothold.

The empire fleet has shown up again, but only a SCTF. My opponent has a habit of trying to guess my range on the allied CV planes and then sit right outside it. This past turn, when his minor SCtF (mostly DD's) showed up, I did have 2 squadrons set to longer range. I did get a small whack at it and sunk 3 DD's, but the main empire force clearly will make its attack run this next turn.

Otherwise, the empire has had more air success in that losses have been about 2 to 1 in my favor. most of that is me committing some lower experience fighters in sweeping and one combat where his fighters must have achieved surprise, because my fighters were not engaged.
Andy M
User avatar
topeverest
Posts: 3376
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
Location: Houston, TX - USA

RE: Dec 26, 1944 - The Townsville area

Post by topeverest »

AS you can see the empire sctf is approaching.

this turn I am
1. sending cruiser bb to Cairns and Rockhampton
2. paradropping to conclurry and normanton. Hope they are free.
3. consolidating my fleet atTownville and putting BB task force one hex to the north where he has to pass.
4. setting out 4 PT tf further out to ding him on all approach avenues to TV.
5. bombing Cairs with 4E
6. bombing a enemy hex with carrier and minor air
7. sweeping several Oz bases
8. preparing for load three to Oz

Image
Attachments
jjj.jpg
jjj.jpg (360.59 KiB) Viewed 76 times
Andy M
User avatar
topeverest
Posts: 3376
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
Location: Houston, TX - USA

RE: Dec 26, 1944 - minor naval air combat results

Post by topeverest »

Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Cooktown at 95,136

Weather in hex: Moderate rain

Raid detected at 80 NM, estimated altitude 17,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 34 minutes

Allied aircraft
SB2C-4 Helldiver x 30

Allied aircraft losses
SB2C-4 Helldiver: 2 damaged
SB2C-4 Helldiver: 1 destroyed by flak

Japanese Ships
DD Ume, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage
DD Giri #4, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires
DD Roiyaru #3
DD Wakaba
DD Bi #3
DD Satsukaze
DD Momo, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x SB2C-4 Helldiver releasing from 4000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb, 2 x 250 lb SAP Bomb
19 x SB2C-4 Helldiver releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb, 2 x 250 lb SAP Bomb
5 x SB2C-4 Helldiver releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 1000 lb SAP Bomb, 2 x 250 lb SAP Bomb

Heavy smoke from fires obscuring DD Giri #4
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring DD Ume
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring DD Momo
Andy M
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 19745
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: Dec 26, 1944 - minor naval air combat results

Post by BBfanboy »

The three DDs hit look like the low value ASW ones - closer to a DE than a DD. That would not take much away from his bombardment plans but could make sub attacks more likely to get through.
No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth
User avatar
topeverest
Posts: 3376
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
Location: Houston, TX - USA

RE: Dec 26, 1944 - minor naval air combat results

Post by topeverest »

Turns out he lost his nerve and retired those ships.
ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

The three DDs hit look like the low value ASW ones - closer to a DE than a DD. That would not take much away from his bombardment plans but could make sub attacks more likely to get through.
Andy M
User avatar
topeverest
Posts: 3376
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:47 am
Location: Houston, TX - USA

RE: Dec 27, 1944 - summary

Post by topeverest »

Fairly impactful turn, even if weather hemmed in allied air forces near Townsville.

Image
Attachments
hh.jpg
hh.jpg (443.98 KiB) Viewed 76 times
Andy M
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”