Matrix Games Forums

Characters of World War 1Sign of for the Pike and Shot Beta!More Games are Coming to Steam! Deal of the Week: Combat Command Return to the Moon on October 31st! Commander: The Great War iPad Wallpapers Generals of the Great WarDeal of the Week Panzer CorpsNew Strategy Titles Join the FamilyTablet Version of Qvadriga gets new patch
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Waingapoe is recaptured!!

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Waingapoe is recaptured!! Page: <<   < prev  80 81 [82] 83 84   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Waingapoe is recaptured!! - 3/17/2011 3:57:13 AM   
PzB


Posts: 5060
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline
Activity near Perth




Attachment (1)

_____________________________



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

(in reply to PzB)
Post #: 2431
RE: Waingapoe is recaptured!! - 3/17/2011 3:57:23 AM   
Xxzard

 

Posts: 440
Joined: 9/28/2008
From: Arizona
Status: offline
Das Boot reference... I'm not sure if I've seen one on this forum before!

_____________________________


(in reply to PzB)
Post #: 2432
RE: Waingapoe is recaptured!! - 3/17/2011 6:28:41 PM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
At Koepang Allied planes got quite lot of causalities at low-level, but in Burma at 100-1000 ft almost none.

Does units there are not in Combat Mode?
What is the difference between this AA unit in Burma, and the one at Timor?

You actually could try to mine Albany. Can Japan, actually, drop mines from planes?

What is situation with independent anti-ship air-units? If attacks at night are limited to short distance, no reason to waste BETTYs for them.

(in reply to Xxzard)
Post #: 2433
Important intel - 3/17/2011 6:47:19 PM   
PzB


Posts: 5060
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline
Will get back to that Inq; Imperial Intelligence picked up an uncoded distress signal from the battleship Resolution indicating flooding departments.
More importantly, a cross reference was made with subs and coordinates were forwarded to Admiral Nagumo.

"Only 10 hexes away?"

Hoist the battle colors and prepare to engage the enemy!




Attachment (1)

_____________________________



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

(in reply to inqistor)
Post #: 2434
RE: Important intel - 3/17/2011 7:29:48 PM   
PzB


Posts: 5060
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline
Message from Nagumo

Enemy sighted; carriers, battleships and cruisers.
Engaging!




Attachment (1)

_____________________________



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

(in reply to PzB)
Post #: 2435
RE: Important intel - 3/17/2011 7:43:42 PM   
yamo1

 

Posts: 18
Joined: 3/6/2011
Status: offline
That's no moon!

(in reply to PzB)
Post #: 2436
The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/17/2011 8:15:52 PM   
PzB


Posts: 5060
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline
No, definetly not - it's the Death Star!

That little piece of intel was very accurate and the KB was directed straight towards the enemy.
I hoped to find all the damaged Commonwealth goods from the Waingapoe Campaign and wasn't dissappointed

From a range of 7 hexes contact was made and a fairly large strike dispatched!
To my surprise enemy CAP was heavy; ca 140 fighters which fought well and shot down many escorts and ca 20-30 of the bombers.

The first strike was deadly accurate and blased both the Victorious, Illustrious, a CVE and 2 battleships more or less out of the water!
The follow up strikes in the PM phase were dissappointing; small and easy pray for a still potent CAP.

The reason I think is this:
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring an Allied CV
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring a Essex 'Short Hull' class CV


Most likely 2 US carriers were also in the hex and provided CAP.
40 Hellcats were reported destroyed on the ground, not sure which ship they belonged to, the CAP was such a strange mix.

Sea Hurricane Ib x 7 -> This must be the ole hunk o' junk Hermes
Martlet II x 16 -> Victorious?
Martlet IV x 24 - Illustrious?
F4U-1A Corsair x 9 -> ?
F6F-3 Hellcat x 84 -> 2 US carriers? But why were 50 reported ground losses? Was the CVE a replenishment ship...didn't think it sank this turn.

There were also an AK, an AKV and SC in the hex - were these part of a convoy moving home to fix battle damage?
This was exactly what the KB was sent here to hunt for.

The fact that no return strikes were launched from 7 hexes indicate that Andy didn't expect trouble or simply used his CVs as convoy escort.
We found the enemy 7 hexes west of the location report we got yesterday; so this was a relatively fast convoy.

Turn sent to Andy who won't be happy...this last disaster can be blamed on very bad luck (the intel provided when KB was just beyond the horizon) and
being predictable (I expected to find something here, just had to comb the ocean and be lucky). If Allied CVs were not in CV TFs ready to strike back this would be
gross negligence but this I can't know.

Will get back with more intel soon but it looks like we have picked up another victory in 1943


AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Nov 08, 43

Air Combat

Morning Air attack on TF, near Busselton at 17,153
Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid detected at 160 NM, estimated altitude 17,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 41 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 102
A6M5b Zero x 18
B6N1 Jill x 29
B6N2 Jill x 31
D4Y1 Judy x 97

Allied aircraft
Sea Hurricane Ib x 7
Martlet II x 16
Martlet IV x 24
F4U-1A Corsair x 9
F6F-3 Hellcat x 84

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5 Zero: 16 destroyed
A6M5b Zero: 1 destroyed
B6N1 Jill: 3 destroyed, 11 damaged
B6N2 Jill: 2 destroyed, 3 damaged
D4Y1 Judy: 7 destroyed, 15 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
Martlet II: 1 destroyed
Martlet IV: 1 destroyed

Allied Ships
CV Illustrious, Bomb hits 5, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
BB Mississippi, Bomb hits 11, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
BB Ramillies, Bomb hits 2, Torpedo hits 5, and is sunk
BB Resolution, Bomb hits 5, Torpedo hits 5, and is sunk
CV Victorious, Bomb hits 4, Torpedo hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage
CVE Anzio, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage
PG Hindustan
SC PC-578, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
DD Radford, Bomb hits 1
AKV Engadine
CA Australia
xAP Mariposa, Bomb hits 2
DD Abbot

Aircraft Attacking:
3 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
4 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
2 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
7 x B6N1 Jill launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Type 91 Torpedo
6 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
8 x B6N2 Jill launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Type 91 Torpedo
4 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
11 x B6N1 Jill launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Type 91 Torpedo
4 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
18 x B6N2 Jill launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Type 91 Torpedo
4 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
6 x B6N1 Jill launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Type 91 Torpedo
2 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
4 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
5 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
3 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
6 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
5 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
8 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
8 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
8 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
4 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
4 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb

Heavy smoke from fires obscuring an Allied CVE
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring a Royal Sovereign class BB
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring a Nevada class BB
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring an Allied CV
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring BB Ramillies
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring SC PC-578
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring a Essex 'Short Hull' class CV
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Busselton at 17,153
Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid detected at 120 NM, estimated altitude 15,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 40 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 32
B6N2 Jill x 23
D4Y1 Judy x 15

Allied aircraft
Sea Hurricane Ib x 4
Martlet II x 7
Martlet IV x 19
F4U-1A Corsair x 5
F6F-3 Hellcat x 63

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5 Zero: 10 destroyed
B6N2 Jill: 13 destroyed
D4Y1 Judy: 10 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
Martlet II: 1 destroyed
Martlet IV: 1 destroyed
F6F-3 Hellcat: 1 destroyed
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Busselton at 17,153
Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid detected at 46 NM, estimated altitude 20,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 15 minutes

Japanese aircraft
B6N1 Jill x 7

Allied aircraft
Sea Hurricane Ib x 4
Martlet II x 6
Martlet IV x 13
F4U-1A Corsair x 3
F6F-3 Hellcat x 54

Japanese aircraft losses
B6N1 Jill: 5 destroyed
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Busselton at 17,153
Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 160 NM, estimated altitude 21,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 41 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 53
A6M5b Zero x 17
D4Y1 Judy x 24

Allied aircraft
Sea Hurricane Ib x 7
Martlet II x 10
Martlet IV x 3
F4U-1A Corsair x 6
F6F-3 Hellcat x 73

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5 Zero: 17 destroyed
A6M5b Zero: 4 destroyed
D4Y1 Judy: 15 destroyed, 1 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
Martlet II: 1 destroyed
F6F-3 Hellcat: 2 destroyed

Allied Ships
BB Mississippi, Bomb hits 3, on fire
DD Radford

Aircraft Attacking:
3 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Busselton at 17,153
Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 80 NM, estimated altitude 18,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 20 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 14
D4Y1 Judy x 25

Allied aircraft
Sea Hurricane Ib x 4
Martlet II x 4
Martlet IV x 2
F4U-1A Corsair x 1
F6F-3 Hellcat x 29

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5 Zero: 1 destroyed
D4Y1 Judy: 7 destroyed, 3 damaged

Allied Ships
BB Mississippi, Bomb hits 1, on fire
CA Australia
CVE Anzio, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAK Henry S Grove

Aircraft Attacking:
7 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
2 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
4 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb

Heavy smoke from fires obscuring an Allied CA
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring CVE Anzio

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Strike!!





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by PzB -- 3/17/2011 8:17:57 PM >


_____________________________



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

(in reply to yamo1)
Post #: 2437
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/17/2011 8:35:09 PM   
PzB


Posts: 5060
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline
The Tracker sunk ships list is very interesting!
Yorktown reported sunk? Possible she's "leaking" or it could be FOW..that we also hit her.

200 KB ac lost hurts; we sailed with ca 650 - but that still leaves us with a wallop.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________



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

(in reply to PzB)
Post #: 2438
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/17/2011 8:42:05 PM   
PzB


Posts: 5060
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline
This is KB composition; I picked only the fast carriers and left the Junyo, a couple of CVLs and all CVEs back home since they're too slow and needed some R&R.
So 2 TFs with 4 CVs, 1 CVL, 2-4 cruisers and destroyers following a lead surface combat TF.

We also got a large replenishment group and an AV plus escort for scouting.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________



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

(in reply to PzB)
Post #: 2439
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/17/2011 11:13:05 PM   
PzB


Posts: 5060
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline
There's just no way to prevent a TF from refuelling its escorts when far away from base.
IF there is a dot base, make it the Home base and problem solved. If not precious carriers are left immobile
after emptying their fuel to fill up the expendable escorts despite replenishment tankers being nearby
- Should be an "Absolutely no refuel" option!

So no strikes today; Andy is _not_ happy. Can understand him.
He says that CVE Barnes had a 30 strong Hellcat CAP that didn't fly? Can't quite understand this.
Also said that fast carriers left cripples 1 turn prior to KBs attack and that all ships would have let map edge in 2 turns.
No doubt the remaining US carriers have left the scene by now, leaving the few remaining cripples.

Thought he was safe as ac replenishment for carriers take 7 days, probably true but I ordered KB to sail before that.
We missed the last pilot and ac reinforcements but others were rotated and transferred from Soerabaja. Wanted desperately to leave
1-2 days earlier but it worked out in the end.

This last strike further improves our situation into 44; we have now sunk 20 Allied battleships and the list of carriers is growing close to the same
number.


AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Nov 09, 43

Skipping all ground attacks in Burma..not very interesting and few casualties.
A bombardment to recon our positions.

Ground Combat

Ground combat at 60,43
Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 38600 troops, 543 guns, 272 vehicles, Assault Value = 1854
Defending force 30893 troops, 456 guns, 136 vehicles, Assault Value = 925

Japanese ground losses:
15 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled

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

Assaulting units:
66th Chinese/B Corps
20th Indian Division
5th Chinese Corps
23rd Indian Division
66th Chinese/C Corps
23rd Indian Mountain Gun Regiment
21st Indian Mountain Gun Regiment
20th Indian Mountain Gun Regiment
Burma Corps
14th Indian Light AA Regiment

Defending units:
11th Division
4th Division
11th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
15th Army
48th Field Artillery Regiment
18th Mountain Gun Regiment
2nd Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
1st Field Artillery Regiment
3rd Ind. Mountain Gun Regiment
51st Field AA Battalion
16th Field AA Machinecannon Company
13th Ind.Hvy.Art Battalion

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pursuit!





Attachment (1)

_____________________________



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

(in reply to PzB)
Post #: 2440
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/18/2011 12:01:44 AM   
PzB


Posts: 5060
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline
Ok that settles it; we sink the Mississippi, the AKV a transport and an escort.
The Valiant was also reported sunk; time to conclude this business.

We have the first 36 ac Frank unit in service, upgraded an elite formation first.
The Katsuragi is enroute to meet up with the KB.
A Zero unit that upgrades to the George without being restricted also arrived

In RL this has been a crap week with a close friend passing away, getting sick and in general not having the best
of weeks. Having the best of times in AE kinda helps lift the spirit a bit...unfortunately at the sacrifice of someone elses good spirits


AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Nov 10, 43

Sub Attacks

Sub attack near Perth at 47,147

Japanese Ships
SS I-27, hits 6

Allied Ships
xAP Kepong, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
DE Isis
DE Fortune
DE Encounter
AS Colombia
LSI(L) Empire Battleaxe
AK Charlevoix
AK Caledonia
AK Indus
TK British Hope
TK Norfold
LST-479
LST-335
xAP Kajang
xAP Speelman
xAP Rooseboom
xAP Sin Kheng Seng
xAP Cap St Jacques
xAK John Burke
xAK Frederick J. Turner
xAK Francisco Coronado
xAK Christy Mathewson
xAK Archbishop Lamy
xAK Portmar
xAK Cape Elizabeth
xAK Sidney Hauptmann
DD Racehorse
DD Vendetta
DD Endicott

SS I-27 launches 6 torpedoes at xAP Kepong
DD Racehorse fails to find sub and abandons search
DD Vendetta fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Endicott fails to find sub and abandons search
DD Vendetta attacking submerged sub ....
DD Vendetta fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Vendetta fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Vendetta fails to find sub, continues to search...
DD Vendetta fails to find sub, continues to search...
Escort abandons search for sub

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Air Combat

Again, taking out ground assault in Burma.

Morning Air attack on TF, near Busselton at 17,165
Weather in hex: Moderate rain

Raid detected at 120 NM, estimated altitude 19,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 31 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 30
A6M5b Zero x 11
B6N2 Jill x 10

Japanese aircraft losses
B6N2 Jill: 2 damaged

Allied Ships
BB Mississippi, Torpedo hits 2, heavy damage
xAK Adabelle Lykes, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk

Aircraft Attacking:
10 x B6N2 Jill launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Type 91 Torpedo
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Busselton at 17,165
Weather in hex: Moderate rain

Raid detected at 80 NM, estimated altitude 18,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 20 minutes

Japanese aircraft
D4Y1 Judy x 11

Japanese aircraft losses
D4Y1 Judy: 1 damaged

Allied Ships
BB Mississippi, Bomb hits 5, on fire, heavy damage

Aircraft Attacking:
5 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
6 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb

Heavy smoke from fires obscuring an Allied CA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Busselton at 17,165
Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid detected at 120 NM, estimated altitude 19,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 31 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 30
A6M5b Zero x 10
B6N2 Jill x 10
D4Y1 Judy x 16

Japanese aircraft losses
B6N2 Jill: 1 damaged
D4Y1 Judy: 3 damaged

Allied Ships
BB Mississippi, Bomb hits 3, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
AKV Engadine, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAK Henry S Grove, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage
PG Hindustan, Bomb hits 2, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk

Aircraft Attacking:
10 x B6N2 Jill launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Type 91 Torpedo
11 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
1 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb
4 x D4Y1 Judy releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 500 kg SAP Bomb

Heavy smoke from fires obscuring AKV Engadine
Heavy smoke from fires obscuring PG Hindustan

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground Combat

Ground combat at 60,43
Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 38575 troops, 543 guns, 272 vehicles, Assault Value = 1851
Defending force 30884 troops, 456 guns, 136 vehicles, Assault Value = 925

Allied ground losses:
150 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 18 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 1 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Assaulting units:
5th Chinese Corps
20th Indian Division
23rd Indian Division
66th Chinese/B Corps
66th Chinese/C Corps
Burma Corps
20th Indian Mountain Gun Regiment
23rd Indian Mountain Gun Regiment
21st Indian Mountain Gun Regiment
14th Indian Light AA Regiment

Defending units:
11th Division
4th Division
3rd Ind. Mountain Gun Regiment
16th Field AA Machinecannon Company
15th Army
48th Field Artillery Regiment
1st Field Artillery Regiment
51st Field AA Battalion
11th Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
2nd Ind.Art.Mortar Battalion
18th Mountain Gun Regiment
13th Ind.Hvy.Art Battalion
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Luganville (120,150)
Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 425 troops, 0 guns, 7 vehicles, Assault Value = 15
Defending force 25 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1

Allied adjusted assault: 4

Japanese adjusted defense: 1
Allied assault odds: 4 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), disruption(-), fatigue(-), supply(-)
Attacker: shock(+), leaders(-), disruption(-), fatigue(-)

Japanese ground losses:
17 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 3 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Assaulting units:
14th NZ Bde /2

Defending units:
II/81st Nav Gd /1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Japanese Unit(s) Wiped Out at Luganville by attrition!!!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Coupe de Grace




Attachment (1)

_____________________________



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

(in reply to PzB)
Post #: 2441
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/18/2011 12:09:37 AM   
bigbaba


Posts: 1167
Joined: 11/3/2006
From: Koblenz, Germany
Status: offline
thats unbelivible..how can andy let his carrier fleet in a hot area without setting some fighters at escort and his bombers on naval attack? he must know that against you he has to expect the unexpected.

and even with this new fiasco, if his carriers were able to start a strike force of lets say 200 bombers with 100 fighters as escort and sink some japanese carriers, he could turn the fiasco of the last turns in to a draw since he can still lose CVs if he is able to sink some of yours too.

congratulations for this new victory PzB. it was a aggressive move to bring the reduced KB so far to the south short time after the battle.

(in reply to PzB)
Post #: 2442
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/18/2011 12:10:12 AM   
ny59giants


Posts: 6964
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

The Katsuragi is enroute to meet up with the KB.


How are you choosing to re-size the air units here?? Will you go with 1/2 your torpedo load of 36 (means 18 TBs).

(in reply to PzB)
Post #: 2443
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/18/2011 12:47:47 AM   
Emilio


Posts: 122
Joined: 8/1/2005
From: Valencia (Spain)
Status: offline
Wow!!!!!! Andy should be really short on BBs. Not to speak about CVs.
Royal Navy is out of the game until 1945 and those losses are definitive.

Please, could you post (again) the list ships sunk up to the date? Yours and his.

In the mean time... enjoy Valencia this week: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falles






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Emilio

(in reply to PzB)
Post #: 2444
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/18/2011 12:00:07 PM   
mikhail

 

Posts: 13
Joined: 8/27/2005
Status: offline
I have tears in my eyes...unbelievable success! Gratz PzB!

(in reply to Emilio)
Post #: 2445
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/18/2011 12:34:47 PM   
veji1

 

Posts: 958
Joined: 7/9/2005
Status: offline
My god, Andy must be beyond furious... You will make him paranoid and extra carful. Good !

_____________________________

Adieu Ô Dieu odieux... signé Adam

(in reply to mikhail)
Post #: 2446
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/18/2011 2:10:51 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5618
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
The bold reap the great profits ... looks like it works in both business and WITPAE!  Great job!

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to veji1)
Post #: 2447
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/18/2011 3:39:01 PM   
beppi

 

Posts: 382
Joined: 3/11/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
PzB have you considered splitting your two Carrier TFs into three ? Currently you are over the 250 Plane limits. I know that the lack of escorts makes it hard for japan to field to many CV TFs. Too large TFs do not have an effect on CAP (at least as i know) but the striking power and coordination can and might be reduced. It can result in smaller strikes or not good coordinated strikes.

Overall Andy does so many strange things that it sometimes even hurts to watch him. Especially his tendency to waste his battleships is astonishing. Even with withdrawls off he has a critical shortage on battleships already. During the battle of Waingapoe it was clear that surface forces alone can seriously disrupt every landing. So husband your surface fleet :)

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 2448
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/18/2011 3:45:38 PM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6073
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline
I've decided to buy this game today after 7 days of greedly reading of your AAR... Thanks. This game seems awesome and you're clearly doing a wonderfull job!

(in reply to beppi)
Post #: 2449
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/18/2011 4:45:41 PM   
Mynok


Posts: 12119
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: beppi

PzB have you considered splitting your two Carrier TFs into three ? Currently you are over the 250 Plane limits. I know that the lack of escorts makes it hard for japan to field to many CV TFs. Too large TFs do not have an effect on CAP (at least as i know) but the striking power and coordination can and might be reduced. It can result in smaller strikes or not good coordinated strikes.


Japan's limit is larger. That's the Allied limit.....unless it changes for Japan at some point and I've forgotten this.

_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to beppi)
Post #: 2450
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/18/2011 5:10:07 PM   
Erkki


Posts: 1413
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline
What 250 plane limit?

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 2451
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/18/2011 7:42:40 PM   
beppi

 

Posts: 382
Joined: 3/11/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


quote:

ORIGINAL: beppi

PzB have you considered splitting your two Carrier TFs into three ? Currently you are over the 250 Plane limits. I know that the lack of escorts makes it hard for japan to field to many CV TFs. Too large TFs do not have an effect on CAP (at least as i know) but the striking power and coordination can and might be reduced. It can result in smaller strikes or not good coordinated strikes.


Japan's limit is larger. That's the Allied limit.....unless it changes for Japan at some point and I've forgotten this.


Sorry my mistake, limit is 200 for Japan always and allies after 44 (lower prior) + rnd(200). So more than 200 planes in a tf means chance for problems.

Manual page 167 -> Coordinating Strikes


< Message edited by beppi -- 3/18/2011 7:43:51 PM >

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 2452
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/18/2011 9:35:00 PM   
inqistor


Posts: 1332
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline
Heh, I just found, that Allied warships can not load troops under Fast Transport mission. At least in IRONMAN.

You can get quite a lot of informations, from all game reports, but who actually will read all this, every turn?

So, how many Allied BBs are still afloat? Around 2?
It seems, that large land reinforcements (Divisions) are pretty rare currently for Allies. Maybe it is time for some ultra-aggressive actions, before they recover?
Time, until April should be pretty safe, it will be tougher until October (production comparable to Japan), and then the HORROR will begin.

< Message edited by inqistor -- 3/18/2011 9:36:54 PM >

(in reply to beppi)
Post #: 2453
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/18/2011 9:43:16 PM   
Mynok


Posts: 12119
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: beppi

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


quote:

ORIGINAL: beppi

PzB have you considered splitting your two Carrier TFs into three ? Currently you are over the 250 Plane limits. I know that the lack of escorts makes it hard for japan to field to many CV TFs. Too large TFs do not have an effect on CAP (at least as i know) but the striking power and coordination can and might be reduced. It can result in smaller strikes or not good coordinated strikes.


Japan's limit is larger. That's the Allied limit.....unless it changes for Japan at some point and I've forgotten this.


Sorry my mistake, limit is 200 for Japan always and allies after 44 (lower prior) + rnd(200). So more than 200 planes in a tf means chance for problems.

Manual page 167 -> Coordinating Strikes



Which says:

Allied TF in 1942 and the number of aircraft in the
TF is greater than 100 + rnd (100).
»» Allied TF in 1943 and the number of aircraft in the
TF is greater than 150 + rnd (150).
»» Allied TF in 1944 or later or a Japanese TF at any time and the
number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 200 + rnd (200).

Which means 250 planes is almost always going to be ok for Japan, since the coordination range for Japan is between 200 and 400 aircraft.


_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to beppi)
Post #: 2454
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/18/2011 11:14:05 PM   
beppi

 

Posts: 382
Joined: 3/11/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


quote:

ORIGINAL: beppi

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


quote:

ORIGINAL: beppi

PzB have you considered splitting your two Carrier TFs into three ? Currently you are over the 250 Plane limits. I know that the lack of escorts makes it hard for japan to field to many CV TFs. Too large TFs do not have an effect on CAP (at least as i know) but the striking power and coordination can and might be reduced. It can result in smaller strikes or not good coordinated strikes.


Japan's limit is larger. That's the Allied limit.....unless it changes for Japan at some point and I've forgotten this.


Sorry my mistake, limit is 200 for Japan always and allies after 44 (lower prior) + rnd(200). So more than 200 planes in a tf means chance for problems.

Manual page 167 -> Coordinating Strikes



Which says:

Allied TF in 1942 and the number of aircraft in the
TF is greater than 100 + rnd (100).
»» Allied TF in 1943 and the number of aircraft in the
TF is greater than 150 + rnd (150).
»» Allied TF in 1944 or later or a Japanese TF at any time and the
number of aircraft in the TF is greater than 200 + rnd (200).

Which means 250 planes is almost always going to be ok for Japan, since the coordination range for Japan is between 200 and 400 aircraft.



What did i write ? More than 200 planes means chance for coordination malus, exactly what the manual say. 250 planes means 25% chance for double coordination penalty which can ruin your day.

< Message edited by beppi -- 3/18/2011 11:16:51 PM >

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 2455
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/18/2011 11:22:48 PM   
PzB


Posts: 5060
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline
Thx guys
It was a good hunt, a few good decisions coupled with good routines (checking intel each day) and a good amount of luck.
As I said to Andy, Murphy seems to be farting in your general directions these days
- So I hope you have a few words of encouragement for him and not only point the finger. This last couple of disasters were rather extraordinary!

I think 4-5 Jap carriers in each TF is a good arrangement; again - it all depends on mission type.
- Short range = low fuel requirements
- Long range = high fuel requirements (for escorts)
- Offensive / defensive mission (speed, surface combat protection)

The Katsuragi will have 27/18/18 ac loadout, the torpedo bomber is a great asset but with limited torpedos aboard a carrier we can't rely to heavily
on them. The Judy is just as important in its own role.

That's great GreyJoy, hope you enjoy the game
Remember that the highs are as great as the lows Nothing can make adrenaline flow as when loading up a turn were months of careful planning and husbanding
of resources is put at stake.

Hey, that looks like a mighty nice town and festival Emilio, hopefully you don't have to run in front of bulls?
Guess weather is nice in Spain now, I've had it with winter now!

Will post an overview of enemy vessels assumed sunk; looks like 20 battleships and 16-18 CV/CVL/CVEs!
With withdrawals off Allies will get loads of battleships in 44-45; Nelson, Rodney, Howe, King George V, Anson, Richelieu not to mention the new Iowas (4?), North Carolina, Washington...then the
Alaska class Battlecruisers....did I forget any? So I'll probably meet another 20 by the time this is over

More offensive actions? So you don't think I'm offensive enough Inq?-)
Been burning lots of fuel, pilots and ac, so need to restock first - and remember, I'm not taking KB close to major size enemy LBA bases!
Except for that and landing armies in Australia, India and Hawaii I'm quite open for good suggestions....

Really not much to report except from ground bombing in Burma!
Now equipping 2 George units with vet pilots, another will arrive tomorrow.
Together with Tonys and the gradual phase out of all Tojos and Oscar our Army Air Force will become much more potent in 1944.
...well, the George belongs to the Navy, only wish we had a proper replacement for the Zeke in 44 instead of mid 45.

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Nov 11, 43

List of (reportedly) sunk battleships and carriers;
..the CV Victorious is missing in this list, but I don't think the Essex class Yorktown sank.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by PzB -- 3/18/2011 11:25:09 PM >


_____________________________



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

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 2456
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/19/2011 1:23:39 AM   
janh

 

Posts: 1220
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline
Congrats PzB -- excellent planning, daring and execution paired with a good double shot of luck.  That intel couldn't have come at a better moment.  Murphy really ain't Andy's best friend these days...

Whether more offensive action is required... tough since allied LBA is so strong at this point.  Else I would always favor executing an offensive at a moment where you rule the game, but I would now be worried of wasting KB pilots for winning just a few extra days or weeks...  If at all, another offensive should be targeting allied naval assets, repair yards etc. rather than anything else.  Yet the US CV will be gone for a while, so would it really be worth hitting a few critical ports?

(in reply to PzB)
Post #: 2457
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/19/2011 1:30:59 AM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6073
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline
Considering that allied CVs are off the game for some time, and considering you wanna avoid any contact between your KB and allied LBA, i'd go for raiding his supply routes in Indian Ocean and in the pacific. Andy must have, by this stage, lots of merchants going up and down from SF to Oz and from Oz to Aden/India...easy and juicy preys for very very small risk

(in reply to janh)
Post #: 2458
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/19/2011 2:37:46 AM   
Mynok


Posts: 12119
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline

quote:

I think 4-5 Jap carriers in each TF is a good arrangement; again - it all depends on mission type.


Agreed.


_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 2459
RE: The Empire Strikes Back! - 3/19/2011 4:22:49 PM   
PzB


Posts: 5060
Joined: 10/3/2000
From: No(r)way
Status: offline
Thx Jahn! Yes, incredible timing with that intel - would have passed behind the Allied fleets if not.
Darwin is as always a tempting target, a trip up to Ceylon is also within range...and yes commerce raiding with fast Car Divs is also tempting.
But first, 1 week to steam home, 1 week for R&R and then we'll see.

Also been thinking about how to deploy LBA in future; it's tempting to gather ALL our resources for the next decisive battle.
Through everything in and again try to blunt enemy carrier air strength.

Considering to reduce our committment in the Line Islands; got ca 2000 AV and would like to withdraw half or more of these and send the troops to the rear over the next
few months. A shallower outer defensive perimeter for 1944 sounds sensible, the one who wants to defend everything defends nothing!

In 01/44 the Peggy army bomber goes into production; what do you think of this ac?


AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Nov 11, 43

Again, more of the same..ground attacks in Burma only and attacks against jungle hexes provides ~0 effect.

Peggy Army Bomber




Attachment (1)

_____________________________



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

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 2460
Page:   <<   < prev  80 81 [82] 83 84   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Waingapoe is recaptured!! Page: <<   < prev  80 81 [82] 83 84   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

0.164