The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

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

User avatar
larryfulkerson
Posts: 40908
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:06 pm
Location: Tucson, AZ,usa,sol, milkyway
Contact:

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by larryfulkerson »

What are your own motivations/desired outcomes for bringing up the "issues"
Maybe we could be a tiny bit kinder to each other?
Interviewer: "What is your greatest weakness?"
Elderly Gentleman: "My honesty."
Interviewer: "Well I hardly think that could be a weakness."
Elderly Gentleman: "I don't give a fuck what you think."
User avatar
Miller
Posts: 2226
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 10:14 am
Location: Ashington, England.

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Miller »

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

7/23/43 and 7/24/43

Circus: You folks had a better handle on the weird IJ xAK TF south of the Aleutians. It's pulling back slowly westward, in plain sight of Allied NavSearch. It's currently five hexes SW of Ulak Island. I guess John was using it for bait. But I wasn't interested in investigating further.

Arleigh Burke led five Fletchers to Adak Island, and DMs deposited 136 mines overnight. An ACM is two days away. The island is re-loaded with fighters scheduled to sweep Amchitka. 4EB from Umnak are supposed to hit that airfield. The Fletchers sank an RO sub on the way in.

Roller Coaster: APA Sheridan made it to Pearl Harbor for a small victory celebration. Wasp and Lexington have 19 days left on Upgrades. CVs Kettle Creek and Olustee are three days from the map. So it does look like Death Star will be ready to move in strength in about 20 days.

Meantime, five Fletchers will reach Mili tonight. I'm interested in seeing if John reacts violently. The enemy shipping around Abemama seems to have pulled away.

Lots of SigInt about John repositioning troops - showing two divisions inbound to the Carolines and another to Truk.

Elsewhere and Otherwise: No recent sightings of KB. No clear picture as to any offensive plans John has as a result of his Sumatra Victory Dividend.

Fun: I'm just having a blast playing this game. I owe John a big thank you for creating a fun atmosphere and for being a fighter. It's also the first time since around '08 or '09 that I've gone deeply enough into the game to get all these fun toys. The last time was vs. Miller (as he noted a few pages back) when AE first came out. Miller is a different player than John. He's not ultra aggressive, but he's particularly tenacious on the defense. He would've handled the situation in Sumatra much differently, I think. He would've rolled up his sleeves and come hard no matter what the cost. I think that would've been the better strategy for Japan as opposed to letting it drag out so long. Each of us sees things differently and feels comfortable following his own instincts.

Thanks for the praise Dan. Not sure if I would have done any better than John to be honest. Oh by the way, its defence not defense [;)]
User avatar
Grfin Zeppelin
Posts: 1514
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:22 pm
Location: Germany

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Grfin Zeppelin »

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson
What are your own motivations/desired outcomes for bringing up the "issues"
Maybe we could be a tiny bit kinder to each other?
Its the ability to bash each other over an issue and then get over it and not being resentfull what counts. This also requires certain lines not to be crossed.
This forum is already the most polite forum I have ever been in.

Image
User avatar
Mike McCreery
Posts: 4237
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:58 pm

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Mike McCreery »

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson
What are your own motivations/desired outcomes for bringing up the "issues"
Maybe we could be a tiny bit kinder to each other?
Its the ability to bash each other over an issue and then get over it and not being resentfull what counts. This also requires certain lines not to be crossed.
This forum is already the most polite forum I have ever been in.

I second this opinion. For the most part people here are respectful and I dont think I have seen a troll post in years.

When people disagree it does not mean they are being rude or mean.

It is the poster of the AAR's duty to security because the poster cannot realistically expect every reader to follow the same code of conduct much less any code of conduct.

And in regards to rules of the game, people set up HR's to deal with issues like this.

In this game CR is restricted in Strategic bombing until a certain date which makes no sense IRL but was something agreed to in game and both players are fine with it. Picket ships can be addressed in an HR for whatever game is being played but there is no hard and fast rule or code that is going to be implemented.

Nobody likes their sneak attacks uncovered but that is part of the game.

This forum is awesome and there is a great group of people here IMO.
Image
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 19692
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by BBfanboy »

ORIGINAL: larryfulkerson
What are your own motivations/desired outcomes for bringing up the "issues"
Maybe we could be a tiny bit kinder to each other?
Heartily agree with that. [:)]

What I sometimes find though is that people have hidden "triggers" that can get them upset even when the poster was just trying to be funny or give a gentle ribbing - the kind that buddies often give each other. Lots of stuff starts innocently, it's the overreaction that cuts the communication IMO.
Anyway, don't want to carry on the diversion from the war any more so I will comment no further.
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
Lowpe
Posts: 24063
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 2:25 pm

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Lowpe »

ORIGINAL: Miller
Oh by the way, its defence not defense [;)]

Defence and defense are different spellings of the same word. Defense is preferred in American English, and defence is preferred in all other main varieties of English, including Australian, British, and Canadian English. The spelling distinction extends to most derivatives of defence/defense, including defences/defenses and defenceless/defenseless. But the words defensive, defensiveness, and defensively have an s everywhere.

Though defense is now the American spelling, it is not American in origin. The OED and Google Books reveal examples of the spelling from as long ago as the 1300s, many centuries before the United States existed. That spelling continued to appear a fraction of the time through the 19th century, when it was taken up by American writers. Today, to the chagrin of those who dislike American English, the spelling is gaining ground throughout the English-speaking world.
User avatar
Grfin Zeppelin
Posts: 1514
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:22 pm
Location: Germany

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Grfin Zeppelin »

Yer all wrong, its Defenſe [:D]

Image
Bearcat2
Posts: 578
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2004 12:53 pm

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Bearcat2 »

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
ORIGINAL: crsutton

As for mines. I am having considerable success with them in my current campaign. However, I have decided that loading up bases has only a minimal effect. Once they are known, they rarely go bang. They seem to have no effect on bombardment TFs and even do not seem to hinder Fast transport into or out of a hex. Rather now, I try to plant them in hexes where I think the Japanese will be moving through soon. They will degrade much faster but it seems that moving through a hex with mines has a much greater effect than moving into a hex with mines. Especially if they are unknown. So, if say I am planning a operation on the coast of Burma and I expect a reaction from Singapore, I will drop of mines just before launching my operation in coastal hexes around in the narrow waters between Sumatra and the Malay Peninsula. So far this has been working well.

That's a good idea. I seldom sew mines in open waters, though I have on rare occasions. But I see the sense in not overdoing a base. I did turn Sabang into a mine-haven, and that worked wonders for several months. But eventually John figured out a solution and attended to the mines in short order.

The only bases that I have mines now are Adak, Dutch Harbor, Pearl Harbor and Chittagong. So my pools are flush with mines and it might work well to try your approach. Thanks for the helpful suggestion.

The island 1 hex to the west of Adak is a good place to drop mines; for some reason have had better success when a enemy task force passes through a mined hex
"After eight years as President I have only two regrets: that I have not shot Henry Clay or hanged John C. Calhoun."--1837
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Canoerebel »

7/26/43

Circus: A stout Japanese bombardment TF (a CB, three CA, a CL, and some DD) arrived at Adak and did battle with Arleigh Burke's Fletchers. It was not a bloodbath, but I think this is one of those cases where the ramifications exceed the sum of the parts. One 13-point (IE, good) IJN DD was sunk outright, a second took "heavy fires/heavy damage" and a third hit a mine and incurred "on fire, heavy damage." The Fletchers suffered minimal damage - no flotation (all still at 0), no more than 2 engine, and two have 10-12 SYS. I think John has lost enough DDs that any battle that doesn't result in at least an equal trade will be worrisome to him. There is also the fact that a relatively small Allied TF stood toe-to-toe with a large Japanese TF and came out ahead.

The Japanese contrinued through the bombardment mission and did moderate damage to the field and minimal damage to aircraft. I'm going to pull back my fighters while the Fletchers retire to Dutch Harbor to rearm. I'll see if they can repair the SYS damage quickly enough to avoid a trip to Kodiak or Prince Rupert.

I missed a chance here to do more damage. The IJN ships lingered close to Adak. Had I loaded up neighboring Ulak with SBDs, they might have struck to good effect. I didn't because I thought John might be targeting that small airfield (he'd been paying alot of attention to it via recon).

Roller Coaster: No visible response yet to the Fletcher TF at Mili. Four merchantmen TFs inbound are 20-25 hexes east and showing no detection.

Battle of Sumatra: Two IJ divisions attacked (shock) the surviving Allied support unit stack west of Sabang. Most of them surrendered. The last few units will undoubtedly follow suit tomorrow, bringing and end to the campaign 8.5 months after D-Day.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by witpqs »

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: Miller
Oh by the way, its defence not defense [;)]

Defence and defense are different spellings of the same word. Defense is preferred in American English, and defence is preferred in all other main varieties of English, including Australian, British, and Canadian English. The spelling distinction extends to most derivatives of defence/defense, including defences/defenses and defenceless/defenseless. But the words defensive, defensiveness, and defensively have an s everywhere.

Though defense is now the American spelling, it is not American in origin. The OED and Google Books reveal examples of the spelling from as long ago as the 1300s, many centuries before the United States existed. That spelling continued to appear a fraction of the time through the 19th century, when it was taken up by American writers. Today, to the chagrin of those who dislike American English, the spelling is gaining ground throughout the English-speaking world.
No, Miller is completely wrong - this is de fence! [:D]

Image
Attachments
Fence.jpg
Fence.jpg (20.68 KiB) Viewed 363 times
User avatar
crsutton
Posts: 9590
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by crsutton »

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

7/26/43

Circus: A stout Japanese bombardment TF (a CB, three CA, a CL, and some DD) arrived at Adak and did battle with Arleigh Burke's Fletchers. It was not a bloodbath, but I think this is one of those cases where the ramifications exceed the sum of the parts. One 13-point (IE, good) IJN DD was sunk outright, a second took "heavy fires/heavy damage" and a third hit a mine and incurred "on fire, heavy damage." The Fletchers suffered minimal damage - no flotation (all still at 0), no more than 2 engine, and two have 10-12 SYS. I think John has lost enough DDs that any battle that doesn't result in at least an equal trade will be worrisome to him. There is also the fact that a relatively small Allied TF stood toe-to-toe with a large Japanese TF and came out ahead.

The Japanese contrinued through the bombardment mission and did moderate damage to the field and minimal damage to aircraft. I'm going to pull back my fighters while the Fletchers retire to Dutch Harbor to rearm. I'll see if they can repair the SYS damage quickly enough to avoid a trip to Kodiak or Prince Rupert.

I missed a chance here to do more damage. The IJN ships lingered close to Adak. Had I loaded up neighboring Ulak with SBDs, they might have struck to good effect. I didn't because I thought John might be targeting that small airfield (he'd been paying alot of attention to it via recon).

Roller Coaster: No visible response yet to the Fletcher TF at Mili. Four merchantmen TFs inbound are 20-25 hexes east and showing no detection.

Battle of Sumatra: Two IJ divisions attacked (shock) the surviving Allied support unit stack west of Sabang. Most of them surrendered. The last few units will undoubtedly follow suit tomorrow, bringing and end to the campaign 8.5 months after D-Day.

One thing that I did not know but JWE confirmed before dropping off the forum was that Allied ships get a bump in gunnery accuracy (1944 I think) at some point to reflect the superiority of the new type fire control systems that the Allied warships starting carrying. With the late fall improvement in torpedoes (10-43?), the significant bump in arriving crew experience 1/44, and this bonus in gunnery, surface combat takes a dramatic turn for the Allies. I noticed this in my last campaign-to the point where I pretty much sought surface combat on any terms with the Japanese.
I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg
User avatar
CaptBeefheart
Posts: 2513
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2003 2:42 am
Location: Seoul, Korea

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by CaptBeefheart »

Mr. Sutton: That was bothering me, too, so I decided to do a forum search. I found this thread: tm.asp?m=2958671&mpage=3&key=USN%2Cgunn ... ost%2C1943

The money quote from JWE/Symon: "Currently the Allies get a radar kick in late ’43. Given how the algorithm works, the kick is across the board: better Detect, better Acc in Nav combat, better Acc in AA combat, just better all around. It’s a wrap-up of Mk-51s, VT fuses, new scopes, all that stuff. It’s an abstraction."

It would be interesting to know the definition of "late '43."

Cheers,
CC
Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.
Powloon
Posts: 137
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 8:20 am

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Powloon »

Battle of Sumatra: Two IJ divisions attacked (shock) the surviving Allied support unit stack west of Sabang. Most of them surrendered. The last few units will undoubtedly follow suit tomorrow, bringing and end to the campaign 8.5 months after D-Day.

I'm not sure I understand (but then again I am a complete newb so what do I know [:)]) why your opponent has bothered exterminating these units other than perhaps to harvest the points as they no longer constituted a threat wouldn't he have been better placed assigning a unit or 2 to garrison them close the hex sides and let them rot? He would at least have prevented you being able to purchase them all back to rebuild them (I'm guessing whilst your combat pools might have taken a battering it should be relatively easy to build up allied support units)

Can't wait to see what happens next!
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Canoerebel »

7/27/43

Battle of Sumatra: In answer to Powloon's question, John has been taking his time in extinquishing the remnant Allied army in Sumatra. I think he's using them for bomber training purposes. But there's no Allied infantry left there, so little benefit in letting the remnant survive. Too, he's probably concerned that I might be able to use my units for some kind of reconnaissance purpose if he leaves them unattended too long. He didn't attack the remnant today, but he will probably do so any day now.

Circus: A sharp setback in the Aleutians today. An IJN CA TF (the same one that fought yesterday) managed to re-engage my Fletchers, which were out of ammo. I'm not sure if I somehow messed up the retirement orders (I don't think so) or if the enemy cruisers re-engaged before the Fletchers could depart port. As a result, DD Fletcher was sunk and another heavily damaged. Arleigh Burke survived, which is important.

Roller Coaster: Augh, the Magic 24-Hour Movement feature factors in. An IJ TF of unknown composition is sighted NNW of Wotje. This could be a sub or a probing xAK TF...or it could be Steroid KB inbound to the sea lanes between Pearl and the Marshalls to slam shut the LOC. I can't take chances, so a bunch of merchantmen inbound will retire towards Pearl, except for one that's so close to the Marshalls that it makes more sense to send it sprinting in.

The two upgrading Allied carriers are 16 days from being ready. The two new Essex class are on the map and inbound. And the newest CVL is making the final approach to Pearl, perhaps three days out. In about sixteen days, the Allies will be ready to move forward with Operation Thin Man, the invasion of Roi Namur and the complicated mission to bring in additional supply and to retrieve excess units, especially at Jaluit.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
Capt. Harlock
Posts: 5379
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Capt. Harlock »

An IJN CA TF (the same one that fought yesterday) managed to re-engage my Fletchers, which were out of ammo. I'm not sure if I somehow messed up the retirement orders (I don't think so) or if the enemy cruisers re-engaged before the Fletchers could depart port.

That's a head-scratcher. If your DD's were out of ammo, shouldn't the Japanese ships also have empty magazines -- considering they also conducted a bombardment?
Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 19692
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by BBfanboy »

I have had my SCTFs set at react 6, and when they have fought and run out of ammo they still try to re-engage any enemy TF nearby! So along with the retirement orders, set their react to 0.
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
obvert
Posts: 14051
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:18 am
Location: PDX (and now) London, UK

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by obvert »

ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock
An IJN CA TF (the same one that fought yesterday) managed to re-engage my Fletchers, which were out of ammo. I'm not sure if I somehow messed up the retirement orders (I don't think so) or if the enemy cruisers re-engaged before the Fletchers could depart port.

That's a head-scratcher. If your DD's were out of ammo, shouldn't the Japanese ships also have empty magazines -- considering they also conducted a bombardment?

The CA almost never use secondary guns for shore bombardment, and usually still have something left to defend themselves even after. Have to see the replay to know more I guess.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill
User avatar
BBfanboy
Posts: 19692
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 5:36 pm
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by BBfanboy »

ORIGINAL: obvert

ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock
An IJN CA TF (the same one that fought yesterday) managed to re-engage my Fletchers, which were out of ammo. I'm not sure if I somehow messed up the retirement orders (I don't think so) or if the enemy cruisers re-engaged before the Fletchers could depart port.

That's a head-scratcher. If your DD's were out of ammo, shouldn't the Japanese ships also have empty magazines -- considering they also conducted a bombardment?

The CA almost never use secondary guns for shore bombardment, and usually still have something left to defend themselves even after. Have to see the replay to know more I guess.
Not only their secondary armament - they also keep a few of their main gun armament in the magazines so they can fight a surface battle on the way home.
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
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Canoerebel »

7/28/43

I know that I set the Fletcher TF's home port to Dutch Harbor and clicked for it to retire there, but I'm not positive I cancelled the "Patrol Hex" order. That may be where the glitch came about.

Circus: CA Tone and CL Sakawa hit mines while on a bombardment run to Adak. Tone detaches from the TF while Sakawa continues forward (the mines were laid by DMs, so not big ones). The bombardment (with another CA along) does minimal damage.

Adak and vicinity are interesting places right now. John is asserting local control through a much greater surface combat presence. I'm content for this to continue until the main Allied fleet arrives for the Carnival op (invasion of Amchitka). Both sides are taking some losses since contol isn't absolute, meaning there's friction.

Roller Coaster: That unknown TF north of Wotje vanishes from the radar screen. I don't think it was KB, though I can't be positive. So I've turned some TFs around to continue their journeys to the Marshalls. A couple others will remain further out waiting for some clarity and avoiding a concentration of too many ships in too small an area.

The Gilberts and Marshalls are much like the Aleuts right now. John can probably assert local control if he wants to, as I only have five DDs in theater. But this is a temporary condition since Operation Thin Man will commence in just over two weeks.

The Allies bought to more Canadian battalions today. These are prepping for Kwaj and are now en route from Canada. CVL Princeton is two days out of Pearl. Enemy subs are in the vicinity, so I've bolstered ASW presence.

Operation Thin Man will differ from Circus and Roller Coaster. Those two depended on surprise. Encountering KB would have been disastrous in either instance. With Thin Man, there will be little if any surprise and Death Star should be roughly equivalent to Steroid KB. Either side might lose the ensuing carrier battle, but I'm willing to accept battle. Both sides probably will be, so both will take extra precautions to prepare. In the end, the battle might turn on weather or the luck of the roll or any number of things.

Battle of Sumatra: The Japanese extinquished the last Allied trooops in Sumatra today. So what began November 10, 1942, with landings at Sabang, comes to an end on July 29, 1943. What an immense campaign in was with so many twists and turns. In the end, the Allies suffer great losses of land units.

So, was it worth it?

Yes, I believe it was.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
Miller
Posts: 2226
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 10:14 am
Location: Ashington, England.

RE: The Good The Bad & The Indifferent

Post by Miller »

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

ORIGINAL: Miller
Oh by the way, its defence not defense [;)]

Defence and defense are different spellings of the same word. Defense is preferred in American English, and defence is preferred in all other main varieties of English, including Australian, British, and Canadian English. The spelling distinction extends to most derivatives of defence/defense, including defences/defenses and defenceless/defenseless. But the words defensive, defensiveness, and defensively have an s everywhere.

Though defense is now the American spelling, it is not American in origin. The OED and Google Books reveal examples of the spelling from as long ago as the 1300s, many centuries before the United States existed. That spelling continued to appear a fraction of the time through the 19th century, when it was taken up by American writers. Today, to the chagrin of those who dislike American English, the spelling is gaining ground throughout the English-speaking world.

Lol I knew that, was just being pedantic hence the [;)] at the end of the post.
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”