Matrix Games Forums

Battle Academy is now available on SteamPlayers compare Ageods Civil War to Civil War IIDeal of the week - An updated War in the East goes half Price!Sign up for the Qvadriga beta for iPad and Android!Come and say hi at Pax and SaluteLegends of War goes on sale!Piercing Fortress Europa Gets UpdatedBattle Academy Mega Pack is now availableClose Combat: Gateway to Caen Teaser TrailerDeal of the Week Alea Jacta Est
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

the end from my side:

 
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 >> the end from my side: Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
the end from my side: - 11/10/2008 4:56:11 PM   
bigbaba


Posts: 1143
Joined: 11/3/2006
From: Koblenz, Germany
Status: offline
hi all,

when you look over at the UV AAR-forum, you will see, that both opponents do READ and WRITE in the same AAR about the same game.

now, i come from UV. i played and play around 10 UV PBEM games and most of them with AARs where both players post their point of view of the game there.

as my first WITP-game started, i read "no bigbabas here" what brought me to the conclusion that i can not write anything in this AAR of chris.

so my presence in this topic was a misunderstanding. why would i write to chris via PN, that my TFs near PH are transport TFs and not ASW TFs after he wrote here that he thought we had a house rule about not more then 6 ships in a ASW-TF?

because i dont like a poisoned atmosphere and i also dont want chris saying that every little succes that i had in the game so far was because of "cheating", i would like to end this game.

@chris:

thanks, i learnd alot in this game so far and wish you more and more intresting PBEM games in the future.

< Message edited by bigbaba -- 11/10/2008 6:58:43 PM >

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 91
RE: the end from my side: - 11/10/2008 6:34:07 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12179
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
Now what can I say? I think Iīm going nuts.

More and more am I thinking about never playing any PBEM again...

_____________________________


(in reply to bigbaba)
Post #: 92
RE: the end from my side: - 11/10/2008 6:54:42 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12179
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
before going into my AAR to see that my opponent quit after one month because he was reading my AAR (and I wasnīt talking about that he was "cheating") I even sent another turn off as he promised me not to look into my AAR again. Well, in the meantime, he quit.

_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 93
RE: the end from my side: - 11/10/2008 6:57:03 PM   
2ndACR


Posts: 5648
Joined: 8/31/2003
From: Irving,Tx
Status: offline
That's funny.....even the mouse over says no bigbaba. I have had people slip (ask the wrong question) in my AAR's asking about certain bases etc and have even done it myself when reading an AAR. That I can understand, but lurking/reading is wrong. Too much time is invested into AAR's and PBEM games for that to happen.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 94
RE: the end from my side: - 11/10/2008 7:03:45 PM   
aztez

 

Posts: 3863
Joined: 2/26/2005
From: Finland
Status: offline
I have been away from these forums a lot lately. Few quick glimpses nothing else.

Maybe a bit fatigue from playing all the earlier PBEM's or such. I don't know.

Anyway, I have read / followed your AAR's castor troy and I know your are reliable / good opponent. So, just pumped in to say that sorry to hear this. It is a shame to invest a lot of time and it all comes down to this.

Good luck though in your future games.

(in reply to 2ndACR)
Post #: 95
RE: the end from my side: - 11/10/2008 7:12:40 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12179
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
thanks guys!

It was at least as surprising for me to see bigbaba in my AAR like seeing him now quit. If the first turn wouldnīt be that much work it wouldnīt be that much pain to see a PBEM ending. And the first turn is what keeps me from starting a new one every time Iīve lost my ongoing game.

And my AARs are just always the same as Iīm posting pics and info of always the same ships that are sunk. Will have to find another style for my AARs. But I guess that wonīt be before AE.

_____________________________


(in reply to aztez)
Post #: 96
RE: the end from my side: - 11/10/2008 7:52:17 PM   
vettim89


Posts: 3251
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Toledo, Ohio
Status: offline
I'd offer to pick up this game but I don't think I'm up for another six to twelve (or more) months of being thumped right now. Sorry about the situation Castor Troy. When I started my AAR, I specifically asked my opponent from entering it at all. To my knowledge Larry has honored that request

_____________________________

"We have met the enemy and they are ours" - Commodore O.H. Perry

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 97
RE: the end from my side: - 11/10/2008 7:56:47 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Personally I would be prepared to put this down to a misunderstanding. Sometimes we forget that people do sometimes not see the obvious but just carry the conventional wisdom from wherever they have come with them.

I will admit though that I can't figure out how anyone could miss the "Keep out" sign in the first post in the thread. Has that only been added recently or was that there all along? If it was there all along then I think that puts a different take on things.

< Message edited by Nemo121 -- 11/10/2008 7:58:20 PM >

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 98
RE: the end from my side: - 11/10/2008 7:57:57 PM   
bigbaba


Posts: 1143
Joined: 11/3/2006
From: Koblenz, Germany
Status: offline
if someone wants to take over the game against chris, just send me a PM to get the password.

the reason why i quit is that i dont like to be named as a cheater or something like that here. belive it or not..it was a mistake and not intentional.

you can see here:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tt.asp?forumid=48

that in UV which i played before coming to WITP, every AAR is full of comments and thoughts of both opponents. so to make it short:

i thought "no bigbabas" mean "not posting here in this AAR".

peace.


< Message edited by bigbaba -- 11/10/2008 8:00:45 PM >

(in reply to vettim89)
Post #: 99
RE: the end from my side: - 11/10/2008 8:15:59 PM   
Rapunzel


Posts: 141
Joined: 4/20/2005
From: Germany
Status: offline
Well if someone relly wants to know what you are writing in your aar then he will log in with another account and you will never notice. So I think it was a misunderstanding.

Sorry to hear that this aar is going to end. It was a nice read.

Thx alot for your afford.

(in reply to bigbaba)
Post #: 100
RE: the end from my side: - 11/10/2008 9:00:54 PM   
Miller


Posts: 1593
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline
I am currently playing bigbaba in a UV game. I think he has made a genuine mistake and has not intentionally been trying to cheat.

What mod are you playing? I might be interested in taking over this game...I will get in touch with him and have a look at the Allied situation, if that is ok with you Castor.

I have started 3 WITP PBEM's in the past and 2 of them ran till late 42 before mod problems led to their end. My last PBEM ran until mid 44 when I surrendered a hopeless position as the Japs.

< Message edited by Miller -- 11/10/2008 9:02:25 PM >

(in reply to Rapunzel)
Post #: 101
RE: the end from my side: - 11/10/2008 9:03:02 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12179
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Personally I would be prepared to put this down to a misunderstanding. Sometimes we forget that people do sometimes not see the obvious but just carry the conventional wisdom from wherever they have come with them.

I will admit though that I can't figure out how anyone could miss the "Keep out" sign in the first post in the thread. Has that only been added recently or was that there all along? If it was there all along then I think that puts a different take on things.



It was there just from the beginning. I donīt want to make this a "someone is a cheater thread". If my opponent didnīt know it, well, I wonīt blame him. The game ended, so thx for all the readers for reading my AAR.

This is not an intention to blame my opponent and I want to point out that I thought that the game goes on after he told me he wouldnīt look at the AAR anymore, that was the reason I sent another turn.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 11/10/2008 9:06:25 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 102
RE: the end from my side: - 11/10/2008 9:05:14 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12179
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

I am currently playing bigbaba in a UV game. I think he has made a genuine mistake and has not intentionally been trying to cheat.

What mod are you playing? I might be interested in taking over this game...I will get in touch with him and have a look at the Allied situation, if that is ok with you Castor.

I have started 3 WITP PBEM's in the past and 2 of them ran till late 42 before mod problems led to their end. My last PBEM ran until mid 44 when I surrendered a hopeless position as the Japs.



Hi,

if you are really serious about keeping up the game. Just ask bigbaba for the details and pm me if you are still interested.

edit: sorry forgot to mention that this is a Nikmod 9.x game.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 11/10/2008 9:06:59 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 103
RE: the end from my side: - 11/10/2008 9:29:41 PM   
bigbaba


Posts: 1143
Joined: 11/3/2006
From: Koblenz, Germany
Status: offline
just sent over the savegame and the game PW to you paul. good hunting to both of you, gentlemen.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 104
RE: the end from my side: - 11/10/2008 9:58:39 PM   
Miller


Posts: 1593
Joined: 9/14/2004
From: Ashington, England.
Status: offline
Ok Castor, will look at the file tomorrow but it will take me a while to get my head round the current situation, so my first reply will probably be another day or two. After that I should be good for at least 2 turns a day, more on my days off work.

I will not look/post in this AAR again. I hope we have a good game.

(in reply to bigbaba)
Post #: 105
RE: Waiting for AE - bigbaba vs. Castor Troy - 11/10/2008 10:49:21 PM   
Ike99


Posts: 1747
Joined: 1/1/2006
From: A Sand Road
Status: offline
quote:

Well, at the moment Iīm a bit shocked. This is a closed IJN AAR and I was more than surprised to see my opponent reading my AAR while I posted another day:


In Uncommon Valor castor troy the AARīs are open for both players to read and post. I believe bigbaba had the understanding Ļno bigbabaĻ meant he should not post here. I canīt think of another reason he would log in and read the AAR under his own name.

quote:

i also dont want chris saying that every little succes that i had in the game so far was because of "cheating", i would like to end this game.


A little like night bombing from carriers Bigbaba?


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 106
RE: Waiting for AE - bigbaba vs. Castor Troy - 11/10/2008 11:22:24 PM   
Lecivius


Posts: 1290
Joined: 8/5/2007
From: Denver
Status: offline
Holy Joe, for whatever reason what a train wreck   I was really hoping to follow the strategy here. 

Don't hang up AAR's Castor, stuff happens.  If this was the worst thing that happened to you this week (and I hope it was) your still having a good week

(in reply to Ike99)
Post #: 107
RE: the end from my side: - 11/11/2008 7:08:02 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 12179
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miller

Ok Castor, will look at the file tomorrow but it will take me a while to get my head round the current situation, so my first reply will probably be another day or two. After that I should be good for at least 2 turns a day, more on my days off work.

I will not look/post in this AAR again. I hope we have a good game.



ok, thatīs great! Have you read the house rules and are they acceptable for you?



_____________________________


(in reply to Miller)
Post #: 108
it goes on... - 11/11/2008 8:06:17 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 12179
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
Before the game against bigbaba ended, I did get another turn during the night. As the game might (will) go on against Miller hereīs the cr of the last turn:


AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 01/11/42

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Naval bombardment of Mersing, at 23,49

Japanese Ships
CL Jintsu
CL Naka
CA Atago
CA Takao
CL Natori
CA Ashigara
CA Maya


Allied ground losses:
636 casualties reported
Guns lost 5

Airbase hits 1
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 30
Port hits 2
Port fuel hits 2
Port supply hits 12

Mersing should fall today...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack at 53,92

Japanese Ships
SS RO-33

Allied Ships
CA Pensacola, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage

couple of obsolete RO class subs are waiting around PM and the heavy cruiser that was hit by our bombers yesterday takes a torp out of a salvo of two. This should mean serious trouble for the cruiser...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coastal Guns at Menado, 39,67, firing at TF 111
TF 111 troops unloading over beach at Menado, 39,67


9 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.
Japanese ground losses:
233 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Singapore , at 23,50

Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 36
Ki-21 Sally x 139

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21 Sally: 1 damaged


Allied ground losses:
832 casualties reported
Guns lost 6

Airbase hits 13
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 82

Aircraft Attacking:
8 x Ki-21 Sally bombing at 16000 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Clark Field , at 43,51

Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 84
Ki-21 Sally x 160

Allied aircraft
no flights

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
P-40E Warhawk: 6 destroyed


Allied ground losses:
556 casualties reported
Guns lost 5
Vehicles lost 4

Airbase hits 18
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 98

Aircraft Attacking:
11 x Ki-21 Sally bombing at 16000 feet

still Warhawks at Clark. Excellent to destroy those aircraft, the most important fighter of the Allied until 10/42 when the P-38 shows up. And they only get 40 a month.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 6th Division, at 45,35


Allied aircraft
IL-4c x 7
SB-2c x 27


Allied aircraft losses
IL-4c: 2 damaged
SB-2c: 1 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
59 casualties reported
Guns lost 3

Aircraft Attacking:
5 x IL-4c bombing at 6000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 16th Mixed Brigade, at 45,35


Allied aircraft
IL-4c x 3
SB-2c x 16


Allied aircraft losses
IL-4c: 1 damaged
SB-2c: 5 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
40 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x SB-2c bombing at 6000 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 55th Division, at 33,30


Allied aircraft
Blenheim IV x 23
Hudson I x 12
P-40B Tomahawk x 15


Allied aircraft losses
Blenheim IV: 9 damaged
Hudson I: 3 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
42 casualties reported
Guns lost 3

Aircraft Attacking:
9 x Blenheim IV bombing at 6000 feet
6 x Hudson I bombing at 6000 feet

Flak arrived at Mandalay now. 2 enemy bombers are lost to flak today...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 48th Chinese Corps, at 44,40

Japanese aircraft
Ki-27 Nate x 94
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 4

No Japanese losses


Allied ground losses:
37 casualties reported

Aircraft Attacking:
12 x Ki-27 Nate bombing at 2000 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 99th Chinese Corps, at 50,27

Japanese aircraft
Ki-30 Ann x 10
Ki-32 Mary x 8
Ki-51 Sonia x 10

No Japanese losses


Allied ground losses:
29 casualties reported

Aircraft Attacking:
10 x Ki-30 Ann bombing at 2000 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 52,93

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 3
Ki-21 Sally x 6

No Japanese losses

Allied Ships
CA Pensacola, heavy damage

Aircraft Attacking:
2 x Ki-21 Sally bombing at 6000 feet
4 x Ki-21 Sally bombing at 6000 feet

In the morning phase the complete strike against the ships at PM failed to locate the target! Small strikes in the afternoon achieve nothing!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 53,92

Japanese aircraft
Ki-49 Helen x 4

No Japanese losses

Allied Ships
AP Katoomba, Bomb hits 1, heavy damage

Aircraft Attacking:
4 x Ki-49 Helen bombing at 6000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF, near Port Moresby at 53,91

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 21
Ki-49 Helen x 6

Allied aircraft
Hurricane IIb x 21

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 2 destroyed, 1 damaged
Ki-49 Helen: 6 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
Hurricane IIb: 2 destroyed, 9 damaged

Allied Ships
CL De Ruyter, Bomb hits 1
CL Achilles

Aircraft Attacking:
2 x Ki-49 Helen bombing at 6000 feet

4 ac lost for one 250kg AP hit on the Dutch CL... my pilots need rest, fatigue is pretty high, but the airfield reached level 5 today so we can move in 50 additional aircraft...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack at 52,93

Japanese Ships
SS RO-67

Allied Ships
CA Pensacola, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage

A second RO sub spots the heavily damaged Pensacola and fires a salvo of 4 torps at the cruiser. Two torps hit and the cruiser goes dowin within minutes! This reinforcement operation of PM gets costly... BANZAI!

I really like sinking Allied cruisers, IMO those are the most important ships right after the CVs. Even though you get more points for a BB than for three or four CAs, four CAs are far more worth than one BB IMO.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack at 53,92

Japanese Ships
SS RO-33

Allied Ships
AP Katoomba, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage

and another hit on the ships that are going out of PM...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Naga

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 18304 troops, 216 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 637

Defending force 19177 troops, 246 guns, 12 vehicles, Assault Value = 484


Japanese ground losses:
8 casualties reported
Guns lost 2

Allied ground losses:
23 casualties reported
Guns lost 2


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Changsha

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 162087 troops, 2252 guns, 27 vehicles, Assault Value = 3869

Defending force 71734 troops, 434 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 2036



Allied ground losses:
685 casualties reported
Guns lost 6


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Clark Field

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 99257 troops, 1382 guns, 30 vehicles, Assault Value = 2118

Defending force 47404 troops, 534 guns, 211 vehicles, Assault Value = 1164



Allied ground losses:
226 casualties reported
Guns lost 3


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Mersing

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 77194 troops, 716 guns, 763 vehicles, Assault Value = 1761

Defending force 7230 troops, 52 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 165

Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 0

Japanese max assault: 1690 - adjusted assault: 1015

Allied max defense: 106 - adjusted defense: 53

Japanese assault odds: 19 to 1 (fort level 0)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Mersing base !!!


Japanese ground losses:
250 casualties reported
Guns lost 6
Vehicles lost 2

Allied ground losses:
11875 casualties reported
Guns lost 78

the Allied had no chance to withstand our attack. For nearly no losses on our side the four enemy units surrendered...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Naga

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 17703 troops, 233 guns, 6 vehicles, Assault Value = 483

Defending force 25545 troops, 226 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 637


Japanese ground losses:
52 casualties reported


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at 45,35

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 7501 troops, 67 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 232

Defending force 150442 troops, 1775 guns, 20 vehicles, Assault Value = 3148

Allied max assault: 256 - adjusted assault: 0

Japanese max defense: 3052 - adjusted defense: 6633

Allied assault odds: 0 to 1



Allied ground losses:
2409 casualties reported
Guns lost 25

a Chinese corps crossed the river West of Changsha where we have a strong force blocking the roadcrossing towards Chungking and Kweiyang...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Changsha

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 61880 troops, 413 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 2011

Defending force 219963 troops, 2467 guns, 27 vehicles, Assault Value = 3869


Japanese ground losses:
29 casualties reported


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Homan

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 34919 troops, 272 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1386

Defending force 78714 troops, 870 guns, 14 vehicles, Assault Value = 1262


Japanese ground losses:
14 casualties reported

stalemate here, doubt the Chinese will be able to achieve something...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Menado

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 1335 troops, 15 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 40

Defending force 2427 troops, 13 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 69


Japanese ground losses:
15 casualties reported
Guns lost 1


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Clark Field

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 36659 troops, 512 guns, 2 vehicles, Assault Value = 1164

Defending force 126077 troops, 1382 guns, 30 vehicles, Assault Value = 2118


Japanese ground losses:
29 casualties reported



< Message edited by castor troy -- 11/11/2008 8:17:29 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 109
RE: it goes on... - 11/11/2008 8:09:50 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 12179
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
Allied heavy cruiser Pensacola was confirmed sunk during the hopeless Allied operation of reinforcing Port Moresby! BANZAI! BANZAI! BANZAI!

USS Pensacola (CA-24, originally CL-24), 1930-1948
USS Pensacola, name ship of a class of two 9100-ton light cruisers, was built by the New York Navy Yard. Commissioned in February 1930, she made a shakedown cruise to Peru and Chile then began regular operations in the western Atlantic, Caribbean and Pacific. In July 1931, her classification was changed to heavy cruiser and her hull number became CA-24. Pensacola shifted home port from Norfolk, Virginia, to San Diego, California, in January 1935 and thereafter mainly served in the Pacific.

When the Pacific War began on 7 December 1941 with Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor, Pensacola was at sea escorting a convoy that was subsequently diverted to Australia. Following patrols in the vicinity of Samoa, the cruiser screened the carriers Lexington and Yorktown during their operations in the southern Pacific from February into April 1942. In the early June Battle of Midway Pensacola escorted both USS Enterprise and USS Yorktown. From August to December 1942, she operated in support of the Guadalcanal campaign, mainly serving with aircraft carriers, and was present during the Battle of the Santa Cruz Islands in late October and the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal in mid-November. At the end of November, Pensacola was badly damaged by a torpedo in the Battle of Tassafaronga, with the loss of over 120 of her crewmen.

Pensacola was under repair until well into 1943, but returned to service in time to participate in the Tarawa invasion in November. In 1944 she took part in the conquest of the Marshall Islands and operated with carrier striking forces during raids in the central Pacific. From May into August, she patrolled in the north Pacific and bombarded Japanese positions in the Kurile Islands. Moving south, Pensacola shelled Wake Island in September and Marcus in early October, then joined the Third Fleet's carrier forces to participate in attacks on Formosa and in the Battle of Leyte Gulf.

During the rest of the year and into 1945, Pensacola regularly conducted bombardments in the Bonin and Volcano Islands. While off Iwo Jima on 17 February 1945, she was hit several times by Japanese coastal guns, but was soon able to resume shelling the island. She provided more gunfire support during the campaign to seize Okinawa in March and April. When the fighting ended in mid-August, she was serving in the North Pacific. Pensacola's final months of active service were spent supporting the occupation of northern Japan and transporting Pacific War veterans home as part of Operation "Magic Carpet". In 1946 the now-elderly cruiser was assigned to target duty in connection with the atomic bomb tests at Bikini Atoll. Badly damaged by the two explosions on 1 July and 25 July, she was formally decommissioned in August. More than two years later, on 10 November 1948, USS Pensacola was sunk as a target in fleet exercises off the coast of Washington State.






Attachment (1)

_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 110
RE: it goes on... - 11/13/2008 2:21:41 AM   
Xxzard

 

Posts: 440
Joined: 9/28/2008
From: Arizona
Status: offline
Thanks for keeping this going! First AAR I have had a chance to read from the start, and I'm looking forward to the rest of it.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 111
RE: it goes on... - 11/13/2008 7:06:33 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 12179
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Xxzard

Thanks for keeping this going! First AAR I have had a chance to read from the start, and I'm looking forward to the rest of it.



thx for reading it! Got the first turn done with Miller, will post the cr later.

_____________________________


(in reply to Xxzard)
Post #: 112
RE: it goes on... - 11/13/2008 7:49:43 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 12179
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 01/12/42

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 92 encounters mine field at Hong Kong (43,42)

Japanese Ships
MSW Choun Maru #21
MSW Choun Maru #8
MSW Choun Maru #7
MSW Choun Maru #6
MSW Banshu Maru #56
MSW Banshu Maru #52

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack at 53,92

Japanese Ships
SS RO-34

Allied Ships
CL Perth

a pity, this is what I usually expect from those RO class subs... torps missed...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack at 53,92

Japanese Ships
SS RO-34

Allied Ships
AP Zealandia, Torpedo hits 1, on fire

RO-34 does better against a big troop transport. One hit wonīt be enough for this big vessel though. Seems like Miller ordered the big Port Moresby TF to leave the area immediately. Wise decision...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 92 encounters mine field at Hong Kong (43,42)

Japanese Ships
MSW Choun Maru #21
MSW Choun Maru #8
MSW Choun Maru #7
MSW Choun Maru #6
MSW Banshu Maru #56
MSW Banshu Maru #52

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack at 51,95

Japanese Ships
SS RO-33

Allied Ships
AP Empire Pride
DD Piet Hein
DD Witte de With
DD Van Nes
DD Banckert
AP Ormiston

Again, all 4 torps missed... we didnīt fly any attacks out of Lae because I wanted to rest my bombers and itīs just fair anyway I think as this was Millerīs first turn after taking over the game... with a heavy cruiser sunk, one heavy cruiser heavily damaged, couple of APs lost and other cruisers at least with one bomb hit, this was a nice bonus for me. Now there are sitting reported 10.000 Allied troops at PM without much supply I guess as there wasnīt a single AK in this TF I guess. Would like to see Miller to reinforce this hopeless base even more. PM can become a pain in the ass in early 43 but until then I can keep it so easily surpressed, that the losses in troops, ships and aircraft the Allied have to take holding the base will be so high that itīs fine with me if I donīt even attack the base with ground troops.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Clark Field , at 43,51

Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 84
Ki-21 Sally x 160

Allied aircraft
no flights

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
P-35A: 1 destroyed
P-40E Warhawk: 1 destroyed


Allied ground losses:
359 casualties reported
Guns lost 4
Vehicles lost 3

Airbase hits 5
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 60

Aircraft Attacking:
20 x Ki-21 Sally bombing at 16000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 48th Chinese Corps, at 44,40

Japanese aircraft
Ki-27 Nate x 90
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 12

No Japanese losses

Aircraft Attacking:
12 x Ki-27 Nate bombing at 2000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 90th Chinese Corps, at 51,28

Japanese aircraft
Ki-30 Ann x 10
Ki-32 Mary x 8
Ki-51 Sonia x 10

No Japanese losses


Allied ground losses:
15 casualties reported

Aircraft Attacking:
10 x Ki-30 Ann bombing at 2000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Menado at 39,67

Japanese Ships
AK Shinzui Maru, Shell hits 1, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage

Allied Ships
SS KXVI, hits 1

proved to be careless here. My invasion TF was still unloading supplies and there isnīt a single escort in this TF even though I had enough escorts at the homeport of this TF. I just forgot to include them... This big AK is lost...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Naga

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 17505 troops, 212 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 632

Defending force 12337 troops, 151 guns, 12 vehicles, Assault Value = 293


Japanese ground losses:
2 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

Allied ground losses:
25 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

seems like the Allied troops are leaving Naga again. Donīt know if this already is an order from Miller or an old order from bigbaba. Nevertheless, itīs the only good decision that can be made here when he should have pushed those troops to Clark instead of Naga IMO.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at 45,35

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 146869 troops, 1772 guns, 20 vehicles, Assault Value = 3150

Defending force 4726 troops, 23 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 5

Japanese max assault: 2936 - adjusted assault: 1579

Allied max defense: 2 - adjusted defense: 3

Japanese assault odds: 526 to 1


Japanese ground losses:
29 casualties reported
Guns lost 2

Allied ground losses:
139 casualties reported
Guns lost 2


Defeated Allied Units Retreating!

the corps that crossed the river yesterday is forced to retreat towards Kweiyang. We wonīt have any problems holding this important position. My owning of this hex makes it impossible for the Chinese to bring reinforcements from the North to Changsha.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Changsha

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 162427 troops, 2258 guns, 28 vehicles, Assault Value = 3576

Defending force 71045 troops, 435 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 2014



Allied ground losses:
720 casualties reported
Guns lost 9

First deliberate attack tomorrow. Will be bloody I guess... goal is to bring down the enemyīs supply levels asap. Bombing the airfield isnīt an option though as itīs only a level 1 airfield and even 100 bombers would only achieve a couple of hits on the airfield and a level 1 airfield is repaired in no time, so this wouldnīt even prevent the enemy from building forts. We only would losce precious bomber crews...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Clark Field

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 99482 troops, 1392 guns, 30 vehicles, Assault Value = 2121

Defending force 50952 troops, 575 guns, 209 vehicles, Assault Value = 1281



Allied ground losses:
281 casualties reported
Guns lost 3

waiting for three more inf units to arrive at Clark within the next couple of turns, then we will attack. Donīt expect really high fort levels and with Clark field being a clear hex we are pretty confident to kick out the enemy soon...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Changsha

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 61419 troops, 406 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1976

Defending force 206146 troops, 2293 guns, 28 vehicles, Assault Value = 3576


Japanese ground losses:
12 casualties reported


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Menado

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 1337 troops, 16 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 40

Defending force 2409 troops, 13 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 69


Japanese ground losses:
12 casualties reported

ordered a nav bombardment and a deliberate attack tomorrow. With only a 1,5:1 in assault value I donīt expect too much. But itīs a clear hex...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Clark Field

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 34365 troops, 481 guns, 2 vehicles, Assault Value = 1275

Defending force 126460 troops, 1392 guns, 30 vehicles, Assault Value = 2121




_____________________________


(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 113
RE: it goes on... - 11/13/2008 9:46:48 AM   
Ambassador

 

Posts: 694
Joined: 1/11/2008
From: Brussels, Belgium
Status: offline
I'm glad someone took over and the AAR continues.  Let's have fun, you playing, and we reading.

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 114
RE: it goes on... - 11/13/2008 1:05:10 PM   
bigbaba


Posts: 1143
Joined: 11/3/2006
From: Koblenz, Germany
Status: offline
actualy, i found someone to take over the game (one of my UV opponents) so it was not a waste of time for chris. and chris, please end the title of the AAR since you now play against paul.

beside that:

good luck to you gentlemen.

(in reply to Ambassador)
Post #: 115
RE: it goes on... - 11/14/2008 8:37:35 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 12179
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 01/13/42

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Naval bombardment of Menado, at 39,67

Japanese Ships
CA Kumano
CA Suzuya


Allied ground losses:
196 casualties reported
Guns lost 4

Runway hits 4
Port supply hits 1

bombardment as preparation for the deliberate attack today...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 92 encounters mine field at Hong Kong (43,42)

Japanese Ships
MSW Choun Maru #21
MSW Choun Maru #8
MSW Choun Maru #7
MSW Choun Maru #6
MSW Banshu Maru #56
MSW Banshu Maru #52

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Ichang , at 47,33


Allied aircraft
IL-4c x 6


No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
12 casualties reported

Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 1

Aircraft Attacking:
3 x IL-4c bombing at 6000 feet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Soerabaja , at 22,65

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 54
G3M Nell x 45
G4M1 Betty x 36

Allied aircraft
Hawk 75A x 7
CW-21B Demon x 6
Brewster 339D x 3

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 1 damaged
G3M Nell: 5 damaged
G4M1 Betty: 5 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
Hawk 75A: 8 destroyed
CW-21B Demon: 4 destroyed
Brewster 339D: 3 destroyed
Vildebeest IV: 3 destroyed
Do 24K-2: 1 destroyed
Wirraway: 1 destroyed
F.K.51: 1 destroyed
Lockheed 212: 1 destroyed
Martin 139: 1 destroyed
T.IVa: 1 destroyed


Allied ground losses:
458 casualties reported
Guns lost 7
Vehicles lost 4

Airbase hits 5
Airbase supply hits 4
Runway hits 57

Aircraft Attacking:
15 x G3M Nell bombing at 11000 feet

Miller moved a lot of the aircraft on Java back to Soerabaja and many get destroyed today. The Dutch fighters are absolutely obsolete. So far we probably have destroyed over 50 in A2A and lost only 2 or 3 Zeroes in return. Also good to see the Vildebeests destroyed, even if they can only carry a torp out to 120 miles...




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Manila , at 43,52

Japanese aircraft
Ki-43-Ic Oscar x 83
Ki-21 Sally x 161

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21 Sally: 4 damaged


Allied ground losses:
200 casualties reported
Guns lost 5

Airbase hits 10
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 42

Aircraft Attacking:
27 x Ki-21 Sally bombing at 16000 feet


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Changsha

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 193066 troops, 2263 guns, 28 vehicles, Assault Value = 3580

Defending force 70315 troops, 421 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1988

Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 5

Japanese max assault: 3647 - adjusted assault: 1573

Allied max defense: 1952 - adjusted defense: 1497

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 1 (fort level 5)

Japanese Assault reduces fortifications to 5


Japanese ground losses:
5161 casualties reported
Guns lost 108
Vehicles lost 5

Allied ground losses:
988 casualties reported
Guns lost 61

OUCH! As expected, this attack was bloody! And still, I was amazed to see us achieving a 1:1 already. The base isnīt totally cut off at the moment but this is only a matter of time and in two turns the troops here are surrounded and all will be lost!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Menado

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 2435 troops, 13 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 71

Defending force 2065 troops, 13 guns, 4 vehicles, Assault Value = 37

Japanese max assault: 61 - adjusted assault: 56

Allied max defense: 26 - adjusted defense: 10

Japanese assault odds: 5 to 1 (fort level 0)

Japanese forces CAPTURE Menado base !!!


Japanese ground losses:
29 casualties reported
Guns lost 1

Allied ground losses:
4300 casualties reported
Guns lost 7
Vehicles lost 1

excellent! I had doubts that we would be able to take the base but it seems thereīs no problem at all...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Clark Field

Japanese Bombardment attack

Attacking force 99624 troops, 1397 guns, 30 vehicles, Assault Value = 2124

Defending force 51031 troops, 575 guns, 215 vehicles, Assault Value = 1281



Allied ground losses:
279 casualties reported
Guns lost 1
Vehicles lost 1


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Clark Field

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 34467 troops, 482 guns, 2 vehicles, Assault Value = 1281

Defending force 130222 troops, 1397 guns, 30 vehicles, Assault Value = 2124


Japanese ground losses:
48 casualties reported





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by castor troy -- 11/14/2008 8:38:34 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to bigbaba)
Post #: 116
RE: it goes on... - 11/14/2008 10:24:39 AM   
tocaff


Posts: 4486
Joined: 10/12/2006
From: USA now in Brasil
Status: offline
In defense of bigbaba I have to add that there are shared AARs of PBEMs of UV.  While this is done in many instances it's not always allowed though.  I believe him though when he says that he goofed. Hell, I didn't even know until today that if I hovered my mouse over the thread title anything would come up and I've been around for a bit.

In picking up Miller as your new opponent you've gotten lucky as he's not only a handful, but very reliable also.


< Message edited by tocaff -- 11/14/2008 10:59:57 AM >


_____________________________

Todd

I never thought that doing an AAR would be so time consuming and difficult.
www.matrixgames.com/forum/tm.asp?m=2080768

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 117
RE: it goes on... - 11/14/2008 10:42:08 AM   
bigbaba


Posts: 1143
Joined: 11/3/2006
From: Koblenz, Germany
Status: offline
aye, paul just captured PM in my UV PBEM against him. he is a very skilled player so i have no doubt that he will be able to hold PM in this game (at least for a long time)...but back to the front.

(in reply to tocaff)
Post #: 118
RE: it goes on... - 11/14/2008 12:58:35 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12179
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
All that is brought to PM now or the next couple of months is lost... In UV it might be possible, in WITP itīs a wasted effort. He can hold it, but he will have to bring 1500 assault points then. If he brings less and I decide to take it I will take it. If he brings 1500 assault points, those troops will be starved to death, as I have done it more than half a dozen times. What helps me in my PBEM as the Allied is the fact that I know what the Japanese is able to do. And one thing "every" Japanese player should be able to do, is to starve PM. If it canīt be starved, then only at so high costs for the Allied in ships and aircraft that these losses are far bigger than what he would lost in just retaking this base in mid 43. So holding this base in WITP is not something I would suggest. And Iīm only talking about "holding" it, not building it up and threatening everything in this area.

Holding PM as the Allied is nearly the same situation as holding Singapore into 1943.

< Message edited by castor troy -- 11/14/2008 12:59:43 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to bigbaba)
Post #: 119
RE: it goes on... - 11/14/2008 1:24:53 PM   
Ambassador

 

Posts: 694
Joined: 1/11/2008
From: Brussels, Belgium
Status: offline
It's a narrow 1-1 at Changsha.  Didn't you bring any armor there ?  Only 28 AFVs ?

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> After Action Reports >> the end from my side: Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   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

0.142