Matrix Games Forums

New information and screenshots for Pike & ShotDeal of the Week Pride of NationsTo End All Wars Releasing on Steam! Slitherine is recruiting: Programmers requiredPandora: Eclipse of Nashira gets release dateCommunity impressions of To End All WarsAgeod's To End All Wars is now availableTo End All Wars is now available!Deal of the Week: Field of GloryTo End All Wars: Video, AAR and Interview!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Rangoon Falls

 
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: Rangoon Falls Page: <<   < prev  28 29 [30] 31 32   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Rangoon Falls - 11/23/2010 1:28:38 PM   
bigbaba


Posts: 1169
Joined: 11/3/2006
From: Koblenz, Germany
Status: offline
Great AAR so far. i am very intrested to see your next generation fighters with armor, self sealing tanks and 20mm MK against the allied heavies. maybe something like "schweinfurt in pacific".

one more question:

can you post us a screenshot of your fighter aces after the huge battle?


< Message edited by bigbaba -- 11/23/2010 2:19:48 PM >

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 871
RE: Rangoon Falls - 11/23/2010 5:15:32 PM   
cap_and_gown


Posts: 2691
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigBadWolf


quote:

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown

In looking at my options, I decided that the Jack J2M3 will be the plane of choice for the IJN, at least for those groups that can upgrade to the Jack or the George (I have found if you can upgrade to one, you can upgrade to the other). It has 4 20mm cannons with 2 of them mounted on the cowling, giving better accuracy. This is compared to the George which has its 4 20mm cannons all mounted in the wings. Plus, the Jack J2M3 has a service rating of 2 and a speed that is just about the same as any of the George models.



Not quite, mate. All 4 of them are on the wings.



Oops, you are right. I must have had the Tony Id in mind when I wrote that.


quote:

ORIGINAL: castor troy

and the George got two more center lined MGs which brings it to a total gun value of 20! I was shocked when I first saw those stats because up to that point I´ve thought the P-47 would be the non plus ultra in regards to firepower of 1E fighters, but the George even got 2 more points. As the Japanese player I would use those as bomber interceptors only.

edit: the P-47 got 24 IIRC so still better than the George, my bad.



That is the N1K1 model. The problem with that model is it has a service rating of 3. In addition, those 7.7mm MGs are pretty much worthless. I remember my stupid Oscar Ia's at the beginning of the war: their guns could not penetrate a cotton shirt. So I am going with the Jack J2M3.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bigbaba
Great AAR so far. i am very intrested to see your next generation fighters with armor, self sealing tanks and 20mm MK against the allied heavies. maybe something like "schweinfurt in pacific".

one more question:

can you post us a screenshot of your fighter aces after the huge battle?


As far as I know, armor is self sealing fuel tanks.

As to aces: my carrier pilots are not aces. To be an ace means you have killed 5 enemy planes. To kill 5 enemy planes means you have seen a lot of action. For a carrier pilot to see lots of action means the carrier is constantly being used. But I rarely use my carriers. In fact, I rarely have my carrier pilots fly. When I commit them to battle I want them fresh with almost no fatigue, both pilots and planes. (I just went through this anal ritual of dismounting all my carrier planes and remounting them so they would go through the maintenance routine and reduce their fatigue to 0.) It is my army pilots that have the kills. I try to keep the Navy formations out of action so they can train up newbies and add to my reserves. (Right now the Navy is running on fumes - I only have about 50 pilots in reserve. Indeed, I have had to lower my standards and graduate pilots with only 48 experience, though I am still looking for 69-70 skill.)

(in reply to BigBadWolf)
Post #: 872
RE: Rangoon Falls - 11/23/2010 5:55:33 PM   
veji1

 

Posts: 958
Joined: 7/9/2005
Status: offline
How is you naval LBA going ? What do you use your betties and nells for lately ? having a high quality ASW air arm would greatly help your fight against his subs.

_____________________________

Adieu Ô Dieu odieux... signé Adam

(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 873
RE: Rangoon Falls - 11/23/2010 6:03:04 PM   
BigBadWolf


Posts: 571
Joined: 8/8/2007
From: Serbia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown


(I just went through this anal ritual of dismounting all my carrier planes and remounting them so they would go through the maintenance routine and reduce their fatigue to 0.)



Can you explain this? I haven't heard of such practice.

_____________________________


(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 874
RE: Rangoon Falls - 11/23/2010 6:37:58 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12264
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigBadWolf


quote:

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown


(I just went through this anal ritual of dismounting all my carrier planes and remounting them so they would go through the maintenance routine and reduce their fatigue to 0.)



Can you explain this? I haven't heard of such practice.



probably down-/upgrading. Get´s you all fresh aircraft.

_____________________________


(in reply to BigBadWolf)
Post #: 875
RE: Rangoon Falls - 11/23/2010 6:40:09 PM   
cap_and_gown


Posts: 2691
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BigBadWolf


quote:

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown


(I just went through this anal ritual of dismounting all my carrier planes and remounting them so they would go through the maintenance routine and reduce their fatigue to 0.)



Can you explain this? I haven't heard of such practice.


As planes fly, they accumulate fatigue just like pilots. For planes with a service rating of 2 or more, or for any plane that is damaged, they go through a maintenance/repair routine once their fatigue reaches a certain level. After maintenance/repair, their fatigue is reset to 0. When you dismount you carrier planes to the same base where an anchored carrier is located, they are all "damaged", i.e. made inactive until they repair. Thus, they enter the maintenance cycle and their fatigue is reset.


quote:

ORIGINAL: veji1
How is you naval LBA going ? What do you use your betties and nells for lately ? having a high quality ASW air arm would greatly help your fight against his subs.


Most Netties (now with Francis! - Frenetics?) are training pilots for torpedo/nav bomb. My main ASW plane is the Helen. I prefer this plane because its high durability and armor means lower losses from sub AAA and the pay load of 4 250kg bombs seem to get lots of fatal hits. I just heard another sub sink about two turns ago. The Helens are really kicking butt. I wonder, though, whether I should think about making some Helen Ia's. They will get MAD in June 1944. Only problem is they are not armored.

(in reply to BigBadWolf)
Post #: 876
RE: Rangoon Falls - 11/25/2010 11:20:05 PM   
cap_and_gown


Posts: 2691
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline
Dec. 24, 1943

Interesting bit of intel came across our desk today: the BB West Virginia was reported as sunk 2 hexes east of Kusaie last turn. The WV took two torpedo hits and 1 bomb hit during the battle of Ponape. She apparently has been trying to reduce sys/non-major float damage at Kusaie and is now being move to a shipyard. This report indicates that WV is probably only making between 2-5 hexes per turn and saw its float damage increase during one of the damage control phases this last turn. It so happens I have a number of SSTs delivering supplies to Jailut at the moment. So they were told to stop unloading their supplies and patrol along the likely path of the WV. Most likely this will just get a bunch of my subs killed. But as slow as that WV is moving, it seems possible for us to score a nice kill.





Attachment (1)

(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 877
RE: Rangoon Falls - 11/29/2010 4:47:05 PM   
veji1

 

Posts: 958
Joined: 7/9/2005
Status: offline
So what has been happening here ? What are your thoughts and plans ?

_____________________________

Adieu Ô Dieu odieux... signé Adam

(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 878
RE: Rangoon Falls - 11/30/2010 2:58:44 AM   
cap_and_gown


Posts: 2691
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline
Dec. 29, 1943

I have fallen behind here, not because nothing has been happening, but because I have focused on trying to do turns over reporting.

First off, my attempt to target what I believed to be the West Virginia failed. I did not even find a TF.

Now, however, another reported sinking has really piqued my interest. In this case, the Bunker Hill is reported to have sunk on Dec. 28 3 hexes west of Kwajalein. What this would seem to indicate is that Bunker Hill was also at Kusaie and is now being moved east. Perhaps to Kwajalein? That is a level 5 port, the largest the allies have around. And if they have been able to get an ARD out there, then they could repair any major float damage the Bunker Hill has in the Marshalls. Unless, of course, I decide to intervene. I am now thinking about a port raid on Kwajalein. This raid would be staged from 12 hexes to the northwest using Jills as level bombers flying from 9k feet. This would expose the carriers to any dive/torpedo bombers based at Roi-Namur, and any Mitchells based in the Marshalls. I don't believe that would be much of a drawback. The Mitchells could be rather nasty, if they are ready. I would not expect too many SBDs or TBDs to be at Roi-Namur. Instead, the biggest problem would be fighting through the CAP, which would be made up of Corsairs. Kwajalein's airfield is only size 1, but the airfields around it could contribute their CAP as well, and that could be a lot of fighters. Plus, I don't know if the Bunker Hill would still be there by the time I got my carriers into place. Anyway, it is something to think about.





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by cap_and_gown -- 11/30/2010 3:00:55 AM >

(in reply to veji1)
Post #: 879
RE: Rangoon Falls - 11/30/2010 3:16:36 AM   
cap_and_gown


Posts: 2691
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline
Cont.

I had been thinking about an evacuation of the Gilberts. After examining the situation, though, I have decided the potential costs in lost ships is not worth the price. There are units out there I would like to retrieve, but I would need carrier support for any such operation, and none of those units out there individually or collectively are worth the price of a CV.

Right now I am looking at the situation on the other side of my empire and have uncovered a serious hole in my defensive network in the Adaman Sea. First, I find that Trinkat Island is within 21 hexes of Singapore. This is bad news, since B-24's have a range of 21 hexes. So I want to get divisions to both Great Nicobar and Trinkat. Then, on top of that, I need to build up and provision with air support the air bases at Chumphon and Surat. These are needed so that I can CAP bombardment and surface combat forces at Victoria Point. (Victoria Point has a garrison of 1 division and some arty.) Surface forces in the Adaman sea can be used to repel invasions and suppress the build-up of allied airfields should they capture Port Blair and the northern Adamans. I also need the air bases at Chumphon and Surat built up so that I can use my airforce against an invasion of the Adaman Islands. Right now, if I were to let my airforce range out from the bases in central and northern Thailand all the way to Port Blair, Rangoon would also be in range. And the allied fighter cover their is extreme. There is no way I want my bombers flying into that! If, OTOH, they fly from bases on the Kra Isthmus, then they can range out to Port Blair, etc., but Rangoon will be out of range.

I should have thought of this stuff earlier. But I believe I still have time to get my people into place.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by cap_and_gown -- 11/30/2010 2:42:35 PM >

(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 880
RE: Rangoon Falls - 11/30/2010 3:25:50 AM   
cap_and_gown


Posts: 2691
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline
Cont.

Finally, I am just about ready to put some of the finishing touches on my defenses in the eastern DEI.

What I want to do here, as in the Solomons and in the Adaman Sea, is use land based CAP to shelter my surface forces who will do most of the work in attacking invasion fleets and suppressing airbases. The airforce can contribute to this mission as well, but only if the allies are limited in how many airbases they can seize in one thrust. Too many airbases and they will have the advantage of interlocking bases that I have been trying to secure for myself. So to prevent them from grabbing too many airfields all at once, I need to add garrisons to a few more bases. These garrisons will prevent the allies from taking these bases "on the cheap". Using SNLF/Naval Guard units will force the allies to commit at least 2 regiments to each of these bases, meaning they will not be able to capture as many in one go as they otherwise might. SNLF units are unloading right now at Kendari that I will use as garrisons.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 881
RE: Rangoon Falls - 11/30/2010 8:34:52 AM   
veji1

 

Posts: 958
Joined: 7/9/2005
Status: offline
what's the plan for Burma/China where he is likely to focus his forces with the beating his navy took ?

_____________________________

Adieu Ô Dieu odieux... signé Adam

(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 882
RE: Rangoon Falls - 12/3/2010 4:55:44 PM   
cap_and_gown


Posts: 2691
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline
Jan. 4, 1944

Not much to report. A couple of sub sinkings were heard in the last week.

For my defense of Thailand I have 2200 assault value at Moulmein (3 inf divisions, 2 tank divisions, plus bucket loads of AT and artillery) with level 6 forts. Three tank regiments are in reserve at Raheng. I suppose the Moulmein position could be flanked by a landing to the south. I am not sure how likely that would be.

For China I am gathering forces for an offensive aimed at capturing the cities to the west of Changsa. I don't want to attack Changsa because of the 2x modifier. The cities in open terrain on the north side of the river, however, may be easier. The key here will be to stretch out the Chinese defenses so they cannot concentrate so heavily on defending one base. This means threatening advances from multiple directions. Already I advanced a brigade into the forests between Kweilin and Henyang. Apparently the Chinese got wind of this move through sigint a few turns back since 3 units were moved out of Henyang to block my move to the north. So already my plan to stretch out the Chinese defenses is to work.

The key here will be the clear hex between Changsa and Henyang south of the river. Currently, Siangtan is only garrisoned with 3 units. The Chinese have concentrated their forces at Henyang and Changsa. By moving to threaten Siangtan, I an either draw off defenders from these other two cities, or capture a bridgehead on the north side from which the offensive can be expanded. Recently, the Japanese army in China received a large infusion of reinforcement brigades. I am going to use all of those for this offensive.

Another 5 divisions will threaten Henyang and the forest hex west of it from the south. Again, the goal will be to stretch the defenders out some.

As for Changsa, 4 divisions and one brigade will be tasked with a holding action.





Attachment (1)

(in reply to veji1)
Post #: 883
RE: Rangoon Falls - 12/3/2010 5:34:40 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 18010
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: Twin Cities, MN
Status: offline
For Changsa, will you move your holding divisions into Changsa and just have them sit? This will, at least, remove any LI production benefits he's receiving from Changsa. IIRC, that's >100 LI, so nothing to sneeze at. Every little bit of starvation for the Chinese rabble helps.

_____________________________


(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 884
RE: Rangoon Falls - 12/3/2010 5:39:26 PM   
Xxzard

 

Posts: 440
Joined: 9/28/2008
From: Arizona
Status: offline
A few questions if I may:
What does your Northern China situation look like?

Have you followed a continuous unified strategy in China or would you say you have shifted as the circumstances demanded? Did you expect to have more success in the North or the South of China?

_____________________________


(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 885
RE: Rangoon Falls - 12/3/2010 9:48:58 PM   
cap_and_gown


Posts: 2691
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

For Changsa, will you move your holding divisions into Changsa and just have them sit? This will, at least, remove any LI production benefits he's receiving from Changsa. IIRC, that's >100 LI, so nothing to sneeze at. Every little bit of starvation for the Chinese rabble helps.


Yes, the divisions for this will move into the hex, but not to stop LI production. That starts out with only 17 factories operational, and it doesn't look like witpqs fixed them. (it would not make sense to fix them.) I am going to enter that hex from 3 different sides so as to control entry and exit better.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Xxzard
A few questions if I may:
What does your Northern China situation look like?

Have you followed a continuous unified strategy in China or would you say you have shifted as the circumstances demanded? Did you expect to have more success in the North or the South of China?


I control the north China plain, he controls the rugged terrain to the west.

My goals have been to establish a defensible line of resistance, prevent infiltrators, and reduce the amount of supplies available to the Chinese. Only recently have I received sufficient reinforcements where I felt it possible to go back onto the offensive.

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 886
RE: Rangoon Falls - 12/4/2010 2:01:15 AM   
cap_and_gown


Posts: 2691
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline
Jan. 6, 1943

Today was the day I began my effort to reinforce the eastern DEI. Nav Guard/SNLF units are being landed on the islands around Samlauki to make it more difficult for the allies to grab multiple bases in one blow. The problem with this operation is the potential for allied interference, both in the air and on the surface.

To guard against air attacks, fighters on nearby bases were ordered to LRCAP the islands. Unfortunately, I forgot that LRCAP needs to be within normal range and so my Tojo's, which did not have their drop tanks on, did not participate in the day's actions as I thought they would. In truth, I have no idea what they did. They were set to 50% LRCAP, though what they were LRCAPing is beyond me. They managed to accumulate 66 fatigue apparently doing nothing, while the squadrons that actually did provide LRCAP had half the fatigue. Well, I turned on their drop tanks for next turn.

Since the Tojo's were out of the picture, that left CAP duties up to my Zero's. In addition to one land based sentai, I brought over the carriers from the slow KB to help out. That includes Hiyo, Ryuho, Shinyo, and Hosho. They did not do a very good job:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Selaroe at 78,118
Weather in hex: Thunderstorms
Raid spotted at 49 NM, estimated altitude 26,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 9 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M3a Zero x 3
A6M5 Zero x 19

Allied aircraft
P-38H Lightning x 17

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M3a Zero: 1 destroyed (lba)
A6M5 Zero: 3 destroyed (cv based)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Babar at 76,117
Weather in hex: Moderate rain
Raid spotted at 42 NM, estimated altitude 9,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 12 minutes

Allied aircraft
B-25C Mitchell x 4
Kittyhawk III x 9

Allied aircraft losses
B-25C Mitchell: 1 damaged

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Selaroe at 78,118
Weather in hex: Thunderstorms
Raid spotted at 13 NM, estimated altitude 6,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 4 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M3a Zero x 1
A6M5 Zero x 9

Allied aircraft
Beaufort VIII x 6
Boomerang C-12 x 10

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5 Zero: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
Beaufort VIII: 2 destroyed, 2 damaged
Boomerang C-12: 1 destroyed, 2 damaged

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Molu at 79,116
Weather in hex: Light rain
Raid spotted at 36 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 10 minutes

Allied aircraft
B-25C Mitchell x 7
Spitfire VIII x 11

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Molu at 79,116
Weather in hex: Thunderstorms
Raid spotted at 31 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 9 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M3a Zero x 11
A6M5 Zero x 3

Allied aircraft
B-25C Mitchell x 7
Spitfire VIII x 11 [these are fairly nasty. wouldn't want to face them in a stand up fight.]

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M3a Zero: 1 destroyed
A6M5 Zero: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
B-25C Mitchell: 1 destroyed, 2 damaged
Spitfire VIII: 1 destroyed

I ended up losing 10 cv based Zero's, 8 A2A, and 3 land based, all A2A. Fortunately, only 3 pilots were KIA and 5 WIA.

Also fortunate was the fact that the allies did not score a single bomb hit. They are bombing from 5k feet which seems to be a peculiarly bad choice of altitudes. It is low enough that it uses the lowN skill rather than NavB, but high enough that it manages to be very inaccurate. Either go with 6k feet or commit to lowN and bomb at 1k (or even 100 feet).

For tonight, I am racing surface forces into and out of these bases to guard against any possible surface interference from the allies. I don't know if they have any DDs down at Gove, but it is possible. I have my naval search assets at Taberfane set up to search one hex shy of Darwin and Merauke. I have lost too many planes and pilots searching over enemy bases, so I am not doing that any more. (The allies obviously have more planes and pilots than I do since they are losing patrol planes over my bases every other turn yet continue to run these searches. Even PBY Liberators are not immune from being shot down.)

By tomorrow's air phase, the overwhelming majority of the troops will be landed and so any air attacks tomorrow may cost me some ships, but not many troops.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 887
RE: Rangoon Falls - 12/4/2010 6:53:16 PM   
cap_and_gown


Posts: 2691
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline
Jan. 7, 1942

Unloading in the DEI finished and none of the ships were hit. The airforce, unfortunately, did no fare so well. Witpqs was under the impression these were "bait" ships. If that was the case, then to paraphrase Roy Schneider when he first saw the shark in Jaws, we're going to need a better plane.

The allies swept these bases with P-38s and P-47s and launched naval attacks with B-25s and Spitfire/Kittyhawk escorts. Some sweeps also went in against Taberfane along with a bomb run by B-17s on the air strip. I lost 23 fighters compared to just 8 allied A2A casualties. Only 1 P-47 was an ops loss and no P-38s. (Why does this game make it so much more costly to fly transport/patrol missions than combat missions?) The allies lost 5 Kittyhawks and 3 B-25s. One Spitfire was an ops loss.

At least the troops are ashore, the ships are safe, and everyone is heading home. From the "bait" comment, I am now wondering if the allies were ever contemplating an offensive though this region. This comment shows no concern that I might be reinforcing bases the allies might wish to capture. Better safe than sorry, though. More speed bumps to slow the allies down in case they should come this way.

I really do need some better planes. The Zero is useless. I am thinking that all my Zero squadrons need to be converted into trainers. The Tojo IIa is basically obsolete as well. It was decent at one time, but needs to be replaced as soon as possible.

Right now I am producing 240 Tojo IIc a month, 160 climbing to 180 Tony Id a month, and 110 climbing to 150 Franks a month. So far I have deployed 480 Tojo IIc's. I will probably increase the Frank production even further, depending on how they work out. There are still 544 Tojo IIa's and 224 Tony Ic's that need to be replaced. Of course, a number of the Tojo IIa's are being used as trainers in the Home Islands and Manchuko. Still, I will want to swap those out so that their engines can be recycled.

I am not sure but I am thinking the Frank and Tojo IIc will be the front line fighters. Maybe the Tony as well. The Georges and Jacks will provide CAP for vital rear area installations such as Palembang and Balikpapan. And the Zero's will concentrate on training and as reserves for emergencies.

(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 888
RE: Rangoon Falls - 12/4/2010 7:01:02 PM   
castor troy


Posts: 12264
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown


The allies swept these bases with P-38s and P-47s and launched naval attacks with B-25s and Spitfire/Kittyhawk escorts. Some sweeps also went in against Taberfane along with a bomb run by B-17s on the air strip. I lost 23 fighters compared to just 8 allied A2A casualties. Only 1 P-47 was an ops loss and no P-38s. (Why does this game make it so much more costly to fly transport/patrol missions than combat missions?) The allies lost 5 Kittyhawks and 3 B-25s. One Spitfire was an ops loss.



I´ve asked this so often and still got no clue what is going wrong in the game... Am already back to 60% nav search 40% rest with squadrons being fully filled up with pilots but still lose more ac than I get replacements. This is just insane. I´ve got 100% op losses of what I get as replacements.

_____________________________


(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 889
RE: Rangoon Falls - 12/8/2010 1:25:45 AM   
cap_and_gown


Posts: 2691
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline
Jan. 14, 1943

Not a whole lot going on. An enemy surface combat group is in the Arafura Sea. Not sure what they are up to.

Let's talk doctrine. In particular, invasion defense doctrine. In the Solomons and DEI my doctrine is simple: use LBA to cover my surface forces and attack enemy fleets. There are enough interlocking airbases and aviation support in those regions that the use of carriers is almost not needed. It is the Marianas where things get more interesting (and Truk too, I suppose).

Up to this point, repelling an allied invasion has not been high on my to do list. I was more interested in engaging enemy carriers. Now, however, I feel I need to stop the allies cold, if possible. So my doctrine is meant to be able to defeat an allied invasion. It will also have a subsidiary goal of demolishing the allied CVE force. The allies get a massive numbers of CVEs in 1944. These guys have around 20 fighters each so can contribute greatly to allied CAP. OTOH, they are extremely vulnerable to both surface and air forces because of their slow speed and low durability. Since they are easier to take out than fleet CVs, they are a prime target for quickly and decisively reducing allied CAP. For my next engagement, then, I will be attempting to target the CVEs rather than the CVs.

With that out of the way, how to deal with an invasion?

The first step will be to have a large commitment of land based fighters. These will be tasked with reducing the enemy CAP. This will be done by offering up sacrificial ships for the allies to attack which my fighters will then CAP.

Torpedo bombers will also be set to night attack. Witpqs better plan on coming at me when the moon is new. Even if this is not successful, it may divert some CAP away from daylight duties.

Once the target(s) of the allied invasion become clear, land based bombers will be moved to the threatened base and given naval attack orders with a range of zero. I want them attacking the invasion forces, including the CVEs, not the fleet carriers.

Meanwhile, surface forces, which will be loitering out of range will be ordered to race into the threatened base(s). They will be given a home port of the base being invaded with the expectation that they will still be there during the daylight phase, with land based fighter giving them cover. Fast cruisers and BBs will race in from 9 hexes away to try to prevent the allies from landing their forces. That may or may not be successful. Slower BBs will also race into the bases, but from further away, meaning they will make an appearance for a daylight action.

If possible, the KB will get itself into position so as to be able to attack the CVEs/invasion, but out of range of the enemy fleet CVs.

The hope here is to severely damage the enemy CVE fleet, significantly reduce their CAP, and make staying in the neighborhood dangerous.

None of this make work. The allies may get forces ashore anyway. At that point, I need the forces on the invaded island to be able to hold out long enough for reinforcements to arrive. I don't want to make the garrison too strong, since that would reduce my reserves, but I don't want it so weak that it will fall to the first allied shock attack. With level 6 forts, I should be able to buy the garrisons some time.

Reserves, meanwhile, will be sitting at Davao. I will have three divisions there, one prepped for Guam, one for Saipan, and one for Tinian. There will also be a large number of AKs and E boats there. When the invasion appears, the reserves will begin loading. If I can make the allies go away through damage already inflicted to their fleet, and through the potential of inflicting more damage, then the reserves can be landed on the threatened island, tipping the scales in my favor and stranding a large number of allied troops on an island they are not able to capture.

Again, I have arranged my garrisons so that the allies will find it difficult to grab multiple bases in one go. I am hoping they will need to concentrate on one base to overcome the opposition. I think the garrisons on Guam, Saipan and Tinian could use an extra brigade each. I am also a little concerned with the northern Marianas, but since their SPS is lower, they make less inviting targets.





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by cap_and_gown -- 12/8/2010 1:26:47 AM >

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 890
RE: Rangoon Falls - 12/8/2010 10:35:06 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 2872
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown

For China I am gathering forces for an offensive aimed at capturing the cities to the west of Changsa. I don't want to attack Changsa because of the 2x modifier. The cities in open terrain on the north side of the river, however, may be easier. The key here will be to stretch out the Chinese defenses so they cannot concentrate so heavily on defending one base. This means threatening advances from multiple directions. Already I advanced a brigade into the forests between Kweilin and Henyang. Apparently the Chinese got wind of this move through sigint a few turns back since 3 units were moved out of Henyang to block my move to the north. So already my plan to stretch out the Chinese defenses is to work.



Hi cag,

Are you worried about troops from Kweilin making the rail journey east to reinforce Hengyang and area as your movements become clear? Do you have a plan to neutralize the railway? I'm not sure a brigade will be enough to cross the river against opposition and block the railway long enough to prevent those 28 units from hitting your flank.

(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 891
RE: Rangoon Falls - 12/9/2010 12:04:52 AM   
cap_and_gown


Posts: 2691
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon


quote:

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown

For China I am gathering forces for an offensive aimed at capturing the cities to the west of Changsa. I don't want to attack Changsa because of the 2x modifier. The cities in open terrain on the north side of the river, however, may be easier. The key here will be to stretch out the Chinese defenses so they cannot concentrate so heavily on defending one base. This means threatening advances from multiple directions. Already I advanced a brigade into the forests between Kweilin and Henyang. Apparently the Chinese got wind of this move through sigint a few turns back since 3 units were moved out of Henyang to block my move to the north. So already my plan to stretch out the Chinese defenses is to work.



Hi cag,

Are you worried about troops from Kweilin making the rail journey east to reinforce Hengyang and area as your movements become clear? Do you have a plan to neutralize the railway? I'm not sure a brigade will be enough to cross the river against opposition and block the railway long enough to prevent those 28 units from hitting your flank.


The Chinese in Kweilin need to defend against the forces just south of the city. I do not expect too many of them to be moved out.

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 892
Death to Corsiars! - 12/9/2010 12:40:37 AM   
cap_and_gown


Posts: 2691
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline
Jan. 16, 1943

The allies launched a very large strike against Truk today. I finally got to test out how some of my new fighters do in combat. The Tojo was something of a disappointment, but the George did very nicely. I was a little surprised that the Tojo did not do better since in is about 15 mph faster. And it was not a matter of skill, as far as I could tell, since the Army pilots were more skilled than the Navy ones.

First the allies swept the place with 175 Corsairs:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Truk , at 112,108
Weather in hex: Partial cloud
Raid detected at 39 NM, estimated altitude 28,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 14 minutes

Japanese aircraft
N1K1-J George x 54
Ki-44-IIc Tojo x 84

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 18

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Truk , at 112,108
Weather in hex: Partial cloud
Raid detected at 37 NM, estimated altitude 28,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 13 minutes

Japanese aircraft
N1K1-J George x 50
Ki-44-IIc Tojo x 77

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 18

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Truk , at 112,108
Weather in hex: Partial cloud
Raid detected at 18 NM, estimated altitude 26,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 6 minutes

Japanese aircraft
N1K1-J George x 47
Ki-44-IIc Tojo x 72

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 17

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Truk , at 112,108
Weather in hex: Partial cloud
Raid detected at 160 NM, estimated altitude 30,000 feet. RADAR!
Estimated time to target is 60 minutes

Japanese aircraft
N1K1-J George x 40
Ki-44-IIc Tojo x 64

Allied aircraft
F4U-1 Corsair x 122

These sweeps were then followed up by a raid by 72 B-24J's:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Truk , at 112,108
Weather in hex: Partial cloud
Raid detected at 120 NM, estimated altitude 15,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 41 minutes

Japanese aircraft
N1K1-J George x 22
Ki-44-IIc Tojo x 31

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 72

Japanese aircraft losses
N1K1-J George: 1 destroyed, 4 damaged
N1K1-J George: 1 destroyed on ground
Ki-44-IIc Tojo: 1 destroyed
Ki-49-IIa Helen: 3 destroyed on ground
E13A1 Jake: 2 destroyed on ground

Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 7 damaged

Airbase hits 16
Airbase supply hits 5
Runway hits 41

The Corsairs were very roughly handled, but they did help thin out the CAP for the heavies. As it was, only one B-24 was shot down; a rather disappointing result. But the Corsairs paid for it:

F4U-1 Corsair - 50 A2A, 16 Ops
Ki-44-IIc Tojo - 15 A2A, 4 Ops
N1K1-J George - 9 A2A, 1 Ops, 1 Ground

That is 66 Corsairs lost out of 175 committed. That has got to sting. The pilot losses, I imagine, will be especially painful. I noticed that witpqs had several rescue subs stationed between Ponape and Truk. But from what I can tell, they don't work all that well. (The Japanese lost 8 KIA and 10 WIA.) Plus, with a service rating of 3, all of the damaged planes are going to take some time to repair.

That the George did so well, even though its top speed is only 360 mph, seems to indicate that the Tony Id may be an OK front line fighter, and not just a bomber interceptor. I just converted my first squadron to the Tony Id model. I will station it at Truk soon and see how it does. (The runway was moderately damaged, but there are over 250 engineers at Truk, so they should be able to repair damage fairly quickly.)

Meanwhile, over in the Arafura Sea, the allies have a rather large convoy delivering supplies to Darwin. I am going to try to hit that convoy tonight. Because witpqs will probably try to retreat the convoy, I am sending out TFs to several different hexes where they might go. Last time I did this, they went southwest. My guess would be this time they head east. But witpqs may get tricky and try moving them only one hex. I am also going to bombard Darwin with the hope of hitting the airfield and knocking out a number of fighters and bombers there. I want to try to reduce the number of naval air strikes the allies are certain to launch tomorrow. Most of these TFs have a home port of Moa which they will retreat to. My fighters on Timor are providing LRCAP of Moa.





Attachment (1)

(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 893
RE: Death to Corsiars! - 12/9/2010 12:46:20 AM   
cookie monster


Posts: 1695
Joined: 5/22/2005
From: Birmingham,England
Status: offline
Nice AAR.

What program do you use to put the arrows in?

And is it free?

(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 894
RE: Death to Corsiars! - 12/9/2010 12:49:33 AM   
cap_and_gown


Posts: 2691
Joined: 3/6/2001
From: Virginia, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cookie monster

Nice AAR.

What program do you use to put the arrows in?

And is it free?


I use paint. It comes with windows. It sucks. I am curious as to what PzB uses. Photoshop I would guess. Much prettier.

(in reply to cookie monster)
Post #: 895
RE: Death to Corsiars! - 12/9/2010 2:42:42 AM   
janh

 

Posts: 1222
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline
I smell a trap...  Would be surprised if your opponent wouldn't expect you to pull some surface TF tricks on the supply convoy again.
Anyway, I am surprised the Corsair did so poorly.  Was it a range thing?  I guess "partially cloudy" rules out weather issues, and the radar only benefited you in one case.  Maybe sweep coordination and just a numbers game since the first few sweeps came in piece meal.  Well, makes for a good start in the battle of Truk.

(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 896
RE: Death to Corsiars! - 12/9/2010 2:49:45 AM   
aprezto


Posts: 822
Joined: 1/29/2009
Status: offline
I certainly note that range makes a difference. When I've P-40s versus zeros and the zeros are at range I do much better than when I'm the one at range.

_____________________________



Image courtesy of Divepac

(in reply to janh)
Post #: 897
RE: Death to Corsiars! - 12/9/2010 6:02:40 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 5713
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
What I've seen from some testing is that firepower is a BIG driver.  Your results with the George would support what I've seen.

I've made some mods and am testing them in Nik's Gua scenario.  ITdoesn't take much change in gun power to make a lot of difference in the lethality of your fighters.   

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to aprezto)
Post #: 898
RE: Death to Corsiars! - 12/9/2010 8:00:51 AM   
castor troy


Posts: 12264
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown


quote:

ORIGINAL: cookie monster

Nice AAR.

What program do you use to put the arrows in?

And is it free?


I use paint. It comes with windows. It sucks. I am curious as to what PzB uses. Photoshop I would guess. Much prettier.




ever thought about paint.net? Freeware and easy to use

_____________________________


(in reply to cap_and_gown)
Post #: 899
RE: Death to Corsiars! - 12/9/2010 10:41:07 AM   
FatR

 

Posts: 2516
Joined: 10/23/2009
From: St.Petersburg, Russia
Status: offline
I think George did well because of its massive armament. This really makes the difference. I don't remember if you are using any HRs against stratosphere combat, if not, the first George model also has the most excellent ceiling of all Japanese planes available at the moment, and along with four guns this can make George a real killer.

< Message edited by FatR -- 12/9/2010 10:43:28 AM >

(in reply to castor troy)
Post #: 900
Page:   <<   < prev  28 29 [30] 31 32   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Rangoon Falls Page: <<   < prev  28 29 [30] 31 32   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

0.160