Matrix Games Forums

Happy Easter!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 Trailer
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: 1943 August 23

 
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: 1943 August 23 Page: <<   < prev  41 42 [43] 44 45   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: 1943 August 23 - 9/28/2013 3:57:37 AM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14136
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
For the situation, I consider them to be borderline ready for the attack. I would prefer, as Quixote suggests, resting them for a few days. My goal would be to get disruption and fatigue both in the single digits. Units seem to perform much better when in that condition. Having a surplus of supply on hand aids greatly in reducing disruption and supply, AFAIK. So, I do need to get another supply run in there even after the one coming up.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1261
RE: 1943 August 23 - 9/28/2013 4:20:04 AM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14136
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
Here are the Allied forces at Lashio after today's attack. Note that the 268th and 26th did not participate. The 268th just arrived and the 26th is pulling back to Mandalay to recuperate. Tomorrow another Australian division and two armoured units will arrive, increasing the over stacking burden. An immediate attack will be made, with whatever units take the brunt of the casualties pulling back to Mandalay to recover. That will allow the units that are in good shape to continue the assault with good supply (by reducing the over stacking penalty).

The USA 27th ID is about two weeks march from Lashio, and the 11th (East African) Division is about a week behind them. The 3rd USMC Division is somewhat behind them, but I'm not sure how much. There are also 3 more armored units now passing Ceylon that will unload at Ramree Island and hurry on.

The reason for so much priority here is that the Chinese armies in the mountains are being eliminated. If that happens the Allies in Burma will face a huge IJA force coming down the Burma Road. If I can get the Chinese forces supplies and reinforcements then I think they can hold. It would be nice if even we can cause the IJA to take some of the pressure off of Chungking. But that is a long way off.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1262
RE: 1943 August 23 - 9/29/2013 12:22:09 AM   
princep01

 

Posts: 916
Joined: 8/7/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline
Admiral, the way I see things is that those troops at Truk are barely breathing hard.  In situations like this (atoll attacks), I frequently attack with disruption rates at 35-45 % disrupted and almost always win with the superiority in force you have.  I would attack several times in a row with the troops you have if it were needed.  Taking that base ends the battle.  No supply, no more reinforcementsfor the IJA and you can finish them at your leisure.  As a bonus, you can shelter in base and start rebukilding it.  However, as I mentioned earlier, it is all to the same end.  You'll take the important atoll, but it is likely to be a shambles the way you are doing it.  That's the only real difference in out attack methods.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1263
RE: 1943 August 23 - 9/29/2013 5:53:26 AM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14136
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
Hmm.

No turn today so we'll have to wait to see how the attack comes out.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to princep01)
Post #: 1264
RE: 1943 August 23 - 9/29/2013 8:22:10 AM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 4166
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

For the situation, I consider them to be borderline ready for the attack. I would prefer, as Quixote suggests, resting them for a few days. My goal would be to get disruption and fatigue both in the single digits. Units seem to perform much better when in that condition. Having a surplus of supply on hand aids greatly in reducing disruption and supply, AFAIK. So, I do need to get another supply run in there even after the one coming up.


I agree with princep01. There is a good chance you will never get fatigue down in single digits. Disruption I agree that a single digit number is desirable but with fatigue my troops on offensive work almost always have a fatigue in 20-30. On an enemy atoll they seem to recover about 1 point per day. Not worth the wait imo!

The Marines and Tanks are really tough and while other units like Army divisions take heavy losses the Marines and tanks are often completely unfaced. Pound away I say but watch disruption. My RoT is fatigue under 30 and Disruption under 10.

PS. I just noticed you mentioned a USMC division in Burma? I would strongly suggest sending them to CENTPAC. When doing heavy fighting against well dug in Japanese troops on atolls and islands like the Marianas backing up an army corp with a USMC division have proven a winning tactics for me time and time again. Its in CENTPAC they will really shine!

< Message edited by JocMeister -- 9/29/2013 8:27:05 AM >

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1265
RE: 1943 August 23 - 9/29/2013 8:53:40 AM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14136
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
I thought getting fatigue in the single digits was impossible too, but that is what happened just before the first attack after the most recent division was landed. Anyway, like you I shoot for disruption under 10, and I pay little attention to fatigue. But when it was low that attack it made a big difference. That's why I say it is what I would ideally like.

At any rate the boys are going to need more supply soon, and even more yet again if they don't bust through in the next two attacks. I also am going to get the fleet carriers back to Truk from New Guinea in case the Empire is thinking of getting frisky with a carrier strike at the CVE fleet. We had a good run where he had no search hits on any of our carriers, but that ended several turns ago.

BTW: USA attack bombers - I've come to the conclusion that it is less than ideal to try and train them the way I've been doing. I've been trying to get attack bomber crews trained to at least 50 each in strafe, low ground, low nav, and ground. The problem is that I can't get any pool of pilots like that because it just seems to take too long. I think I'm going to give up on low nav except for any specialized USA units. The thing is that attack bomber units take a fair number of losses to flak, so trained replacement pilots are needed to keep the groups effective.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 1266
RE: 1943 August 23 - 9/29/2013 9:19:20 AM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 4166
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

I thought getting fatigue in the single digits was impossible too, but that is what happened just before the first attack after the most recent division was landed. Anyway, like you I shoot for disruption under 10, and I pay little attention to fatigue. But when it was low that attack it made a big difference. That's why I say it is what I would ideally like.



I have noticed this too. Just after landing the fatigue can be 40-70(!) but after just a turn it can be down to 5-10 before the first attack. Not sure why.

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

BTW: USA attack bombers - I've come to the conclusion that it is less than ideal to try and train them the way I've been doing. I've been trying to get attack bomber crews trained to at least 50 each in strafe, low ground, low nav, and ground. The problem is that I can't get any pool of pilots like that because it just seems to take too long. I think I'm going to give up on low nav except for any specialized USA units. The thing is that attack bomber units take a fair number of losses to flak, so trained replacement pilots are needed to keep the groups effective.


Don´t train too many in LOWNAV. When the B29s start arriving the do so with mostly LOWNAV pilots. I probably have over 200 pilots trained in LOWNAV now and a critical shortage of GRND trained pilots as I have to take them from the pool to man the B29s. *sigh*

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1267
RE: 1943 August 23 - 9/29/2013 5:13:39 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14136
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

When the B29s start arriving the do so with mostly LOWNAV pilots.


Holy cow! I had no idea about that. I'm trying to train up extra ground bombing pilots but I think I am falling short of the mark. I plan to dump my experienced 4EB pilots into reserve and use trained but new pilots there (to get up their experience). I'm just loath to do it - most especially with the groups in India - because the groups' effectiveness will go down dramatically for quite some time. But if I wait until the B29s arrive I will probably not have enough top notch pilots for them, and I really want to get the most out of the B29s.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 1268
RE: 1943 August 23 - 9/29/2013 6:35:00 PM   
princep01

 

Posts: 916
Joined: 8/7/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline
Guys, a quick question.  When does monsoon season begin and end?  I cannot find it in the manual.

Also, about pilot allocation.  In my training program, I frequently train pilots in various functions and then assign them to RESERVE.  A few get assigned to frontline units that need a levy of good pilots, but the RESERVE pilot pool is large.  Question: when you assign reserve pilots either from TRACOM or RESERVE, is there a way to assign pilots well trained in airfield, port or ground bombardment to a bomber unit?  Often when I just take them from the RESERVE pool, I get fighter pilots flying B-24s.  There must be a way to get spefiically trained pilots into speific aircraft but I'm too dumb to figure it out.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1269
RE: 1943 August 23 - 9/29/2013 6:38:56 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 4166
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
I found this among my notes!

quote:

I'll want to do that during the monsoon season (15th May, 15th oct).


No idea where I got it from though!

(in reply to princep01)
Post #: 1270
RE: 1943 August 23 - 9/29/2013 6:47:13 PM   
Quixote


Posts: 709
Joined: 8/14/2008
From: Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

Also, about pilot allocation. In my training program, I frequently train pilots in various functions and then assign them to RESERVE. A few get assigned to frontline units that need a levy of good pilots, but the RESERVE pilot pool is large. Question: when you assign reserve pilots either from TRACOM or RESERVE, is there a way to assign pilots well trained in airfield, port or ground bombardment to a bomber unit? Often when I just take them from the RESERVE pool, I get fighter pilots flying B-24s. There must be a way to get spefiically trained pilots into speific aircraft but I'm too dumb to figure it out.







Attachment (1)

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 1271
RE: 1943 August 23 - 9/30/2013 5:24:15 PM   
princep01

 

Posts: 916
Joined: 8/7/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline
Joc, Quixote, thank you both very much.  Those responses really help.  Much appreciated.

(in reply to Quixote)
Post #: 1272
1943 August 24 - 10/1/2013 6:28:02 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14136
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
1943 August 25

The Empire captured:


The Allies captured:
Wau
Lae

There were Imperial amphibious operations at:


There were Allied amphibious operations at:


1,600 AV, including some units that are still highly disrupted, will attack tomorrow at Lashio. It looks like at least some enemy units are withdrawing to the SE as there are now 2 units across the river there. Our force is greatly over stacked so this will be the only attack at that level. Supply is good but has severely pulled on supply in Burma. At sea an IJN TF has made an incursion into the bay of Bengal, 7 hexes W Ramree Island. We have a convoy with 3x armored units just E of Ceylon making its way toward Ramree, so the timing is poor for us. Also, a collision between a PC (now heading back to Colombo) and a transport ("PC Yarra collides with xAP Clan Macnaughton at 28 , 51 ") has slowed the convoy at this critical time. The RN is sortieing from Colombo to ward the convoy as it makes for the turn near Madras, while Palliser's cruiser force on guard at Ramree moves out to try and catch the small IJN combatants. An xAK was torpedoed in convoy moving north past Phuket, so the incursion into the bay of Bengal might be cover for their movement.

The attack at Truk went well in terms of casualty ratio, although our troops AV adjusted very poorly (meaning 'downward').
quote:


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

Ground combat at Truk (112,108)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 25427 troops, 398 guns, 481 vehicles, Assault Value = 872

Defending force 18107 troops, 225 guns, 5 vehicles, Assault Value = 393

Allied adjusted assault: 675

Japanese adjusted defense: 739

Allied assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 0)

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), preparation(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
647 casualties reported
Squads: 15 destroyed, 71 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 10 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 23 (1 destroyed, 22 disabled)
Vehicles lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
265 casualties reported
Squads: 4 destroyed, 59 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 24 disabled
Engineers: 3 destroyed, 2 disabled
Vehicles lost 31 (3 destroyed, 28 disabled)

Assaulting units:
763rd Tank Battalion
1st Marine Division
762nd Tank Battalion
2nd Marine Division
Otago (Mtd) Rifles Regiment
1st AmphTrac Engineer Battalion
3rd Pioneer Battalion
3rd NZ Division

Defending units:
Sasebo 5th SNLF
42nd Naval Guard Unit
30th Infantry Regiment
Guards Mixed Brigade
48th Naval Guard Unit
46th Naval Guard Unit
41st Infantry Rgt /2
Truk Naval Fortress
4th Base Force
4th Port Unit


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

A supply convoy of 3x AKA and 2x DD will unload tonight/tomorrow at Truk, and a single CA will bombard to cover them. The fleet carriers will move back to Truk from Hollandia, arriving in three days. Essex will be waiting for them there. BB Oklahoma only took one hit while bombarding but has built up to 26 sys damage and will enter port at Kavieng to repair. Kavieng itself is now home to a host of floating dry docks and repair ships in addition to a fleet advanced base force. There is another fleet advanced base force at sea ready for Truk, and the 3rd is now loading at San Francisco. BB New Mexico is in the yard at Mare Island, estimated at 38 days for repairs.

Here is a look at both the force at Lashio and the IJN incursion into the Bay of Bengal.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to princep01)
Post #: 1273
RE: 1943 August 24 - 10/1/2013 6:28:57 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14136
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
Bonus pic: our forces at Truk after today's attack.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1274
RE: 1943 August 24 - 10/1/2013 6:39:31 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 4166
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
Time to rest a bit at Truk. Don´t worry too much about the adjusted AV as long as you kill more than you receive. You are going in the right direction.

Your tank units look oddly beat up? Have they upgraded to the Shermans yet? Can´t remember when that kicks in.

PS. How much support do you have at Truk? Are you in the "green"? If not it might be a good idea to dump 1-2 USA BFs in there (200 Support) regardless of poor prep. With too little support units recover really slowly.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1275
RE: 1943 August 24 - 10/1/2013 6:44:27 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14136
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
The two USA tank units have Shermans. The three NZ units have Stuarts, and two of those units have been destroyed.

Support is green, although I don't recall the amount of the overage. Recovery has been pretty decent, at least in those two divisions. They are very good units with excellent commanders, both of which matter.

I'm happy with this combat overall, it's just that if they make all their die rolls at this point they should get adjusted AV well in excess of raw AV and blast right through. Ain't happening though!

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 1276
RE: 1943 August 24 - 10/1/2013 6:53:48 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 4166
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
Wow, wonder if DBB changed something? I have never had my Shermans beat up. Only lost 2 in battle so far that I´m aware of. I suffer some diablements from time to time but thats about it. I wouldn´t call them invulnerable...but pretty darn close to it. Like Jap tanks in China!

And looking at your opponents available troops it doesn´t seem to be anything there that could dent a Sherman. Odd?

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1277
RE: 1943 August 24 - 10/1/2013 7:01:22 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14136
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
I didn't look at those units this turn, but the Shermans have done very well. Mostly disablements with only a few losses. In fact, even disablements were low and have maybe gradually built up. I'm not sure what he has that can really hurt them - maybe some of those CD guns can fire shoreward? BTW those units each have a smaller complement of Stuarts so they will also show in the losses.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 1278
RE: 1943 August 24 - 10/1/2013 7:35:35 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14136
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
Truk armor/armour, 1:




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1279
RE: 1943 August 24 - 10/1/2013 7:35:55 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14136
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
2:




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1280
RE: 1943 August 24 - 10/1/2013 7:36:14 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14136
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
3:




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1281
RE: 1943 August 24 - 10/1/2013 7:37:48 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 4166
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
Never had my tanks get that beat up. Wonder if DBB tweaked them a bit? I suffer disablements in single digits. If it all!

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1282
1943 August 26 - 10/1/2013 10:11:41 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14136
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
1943 August 26

The Empire captured:


The Allies captured:
Salamaua

There were Imperial amphibious operations at:


There were Allied amphibious operations at:


The combat at Lashio was tough, as I expected. We are pushing there, racing to provide relief to the Chinese Army before they are annihilated. I am pulling back the 1st Garrison Brigade, 19th Indian Division, and 6th Australian Division to relieve the over stacking and allow those units to recover. The remaining units will attack again when ready.
quote:


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

Ground combat at Lashio (62,46)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 60903 troops, 1042 guns, 885 vehicles, Assault Value = 1614

Defending force 22784 troops, 157 guns, 2 vehicles, Assault Value = 630

Allied adjusted assault: 1982

Japanese adjusted defense: 1546

Allied assault odds: 1 to 1 (fort level 3)

Allied Assault reduces fortifications to 2

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), experience(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
1089 casualties reported
Squads: 6 destroyed, 87 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 9 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 12 (1 destroyed, 11 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
4608 casualties reported
Squads: 120 destroyed, 222 disabled
Non Combat: 26 destroyed, 20 disabled
Engineers: 15 destroyed, 39 disabled
Guns lost 100 (26 destroyed, 74 disabled)
Vehicles lost 40 (13 destroyed, 27 disabled)

Assaulting units:
19th Indian Division
754th Tank Battalion
6th Australian Division
7th Australian Division
1st Garrison Brigade
268th Motorised Brigade
22nd (East African) Brigade
1st Army Tank Regiment
9th Australian Division
27th Indian Field Artillery Battalion
3rd (Special Force) Division

Defending units:
64th Inf Group Brigade
Tanaka
III./143rd Infantry Battalion
113th Infantry Regiment
1st Formosa Inf. Regiment
21st/A Division



Our AKA at Truk were savaged. One will sink, another might. They delivered part of their load and now head for Kavieng. Meanwhile the ground troops at Truk will attack tomorrow. The fleet carriers will be 6 hexes WSW Truk tomorrow and Essex will join them there.

Here are the haggard units at Lashio.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 1283
RE: 1943 August 26 - 10/1/2013 10:12:20 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14136
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
And here are the forces at Truk on the eve of the next attack.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1284
RE: 1943 August 26 - 10/2/2013 12:12:12 AM   
TulliusDetritus


Posts: 4221
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: Back to Reality :(
Status: offline
I have read half of the AAR. Good read

But one thing I find amusing... The strategy you have followed is Winston Churchill's wildest wet dream!

_____________________________

"When the seagulls follow a trawler, it's because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea" -- Eric Cantona, XX century philosopher

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1285
RE: 1943 August 26 - 10/2/2013 12:41:31 AM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14136
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

I have read half of the AAR. Good read

But one thing I find amusing... The strategy you have followed is Winston Churchill's wildest wet dream!

Thanks, and yes, I guess it is!

Hey - where have you been? Good to see you here!

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to TulliusDetritus)
Post #: 1286
RE: 1943 August 26 - 10/2/2013 1:15:19 AM   
TulliusDetritus


Posts: 4221
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: Back to Reality :(
Status: offline
I was trolling the WitE forum Nah, I was playing WitE PBEM games and then writing their AARs (3 games)

And only now -after playing WitP since august 2004- I'm thinking about starting a PBEM game: the REAL thing, obviously.

Anyways, as for the Churchill thing, there's the other side of the coin. You have basically ostracized er... MacArthur himself, the Big Man!

We have a main effort in Burma / India and then your offensive in the Pacific was the task of the South / Central Pacific Areas aka the Navy.

_____________________________

"When the seagulls follow a trawler, it's because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea" -- Eric Cantona, XX century philosopher

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 1287
RE: 1943 August 26 - 10/2/2013 1:20:52 AM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14136
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
MacWho?

I plan to shift the carrier fleet to SWPac targets south and west of New Guinea after the Marianas and maybe some smaller fry.

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to TulliusDetritus)
Post #: 1288
RE: 1943 August 26 - 10/2/2013 1:21:11 AM   
TulliusDetritus


Posts: 4221
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: Back to Reality :(
Status: offline
Your Burma campaign (the defensive part) was *impressive*. And I have been toying with land warfare these last two years (WitE). very intelligently played, in my opinion

Right now Churchill has the King ready to 100% knight you!

_____________________________

"When the seagulls follow a trawler, it's because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea" -- Eric Cantona, XX century philosopher

(in reply to TulliusDetritus)
Post #: 1289
1943 August 27 - 10/2/2013 9:52:04 PM   
witpqs

 

Posts: 14136
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
1943 August 27

The Empire captured:


The Allies captured:
Saidor

There were Imperial amphibious operations at:


There were Allied amphibious operations at:


Three successful Allied sub attacks around the map, 2 on xAK ships and 1 on a PB. In addition there was this gem in the waters approaching Rangoon.
quote:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Rangoon at 53,55

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid spotted at 7 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 4 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-44-IIa Tojo x 15

Allied aircraft
Albacore I x 5

No Japanese losses

No Allied losses

Japanese Ships
xAK Fushimi Maru, Torpedo hits 1, heavy damage
xAK Africa Maru

Aircraft Attacking:
5 x Albacore I launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Mk XII Torpedo

CAP engaged:
25th Sentai with Ki-44-IIa Tojo (15 airborne, 0 on standby, 0 scrambling)
(15 plane(s) diverted to support CAP in hex.)
15 plane(s) intercepting now.
Group patrol altitude is 24000
Raid is overhead



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

This was paid for by the loss of 21x P-40K sweeping over Rangoon in return for only about 1/3 that number of mixed fighters (mostly Tojo). DAW HQ is aware that our main air cover has shifted to the battle for Lashio and has beefed up CAP over Rangoon to take advantage.

Out attack at Truk went poorly, so now the troops will rest longer to get disruption in the single digits and fatigue as low as practical.
quote:


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

Ground combat at Truk (112,108)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 25134 troops, 398 guns, 479 vehicles, Assault Value = 834

Defending force 17958 troops, 224 guns, 5 vehicles, Assault Value = 375

Allied adjusted assault: 925

Japanese adjusted defense: 1078

Allied assault odds: 1 to 2 (fort level 0)

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), experience(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
579 casualties reported
Squads: 10 destroyed, 47 disabled
Non Combat: 3 destroyed, 7 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
Guns lost 15 (2 destroyed, 13 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
1386 casualties reported
Squads: 22 destroyed, 183 disabled
Non Combat: 3 destroyed, 52 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 10 disabled
Guns lost 30 (8 destroyed, 22 disabled)
Vehicles lost 47 (5 destroyed, 42 disabled)

Assaulting units:
2nd Marine Division
763rd Tank Battalion
762nd Tank Battalion
1st Marine Division
Otago (Mtd) Rifles Regiment
1st AmphTrac Engineer Battalion
3rd Pioneer Battalion
3rd NZ Division

Defending units:
Guards Mixed Brigade
Sasebo 5th SNLF
48th Naval Guard Unit
30th Infantry Regiment
42nd Naval Guard Unit
46th Naval Guard Unit
41st Infantry Rgt /2
Truk Naval Fortress
4th Base Force
4th Port Unit



Here are the troops at Truk. I might bring the 3rd USMC Div back in, which has recovered markedly (as has the 24th ID). I'll decide after the next attack.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Intel Monkey: https://sites.google.com/site/staffmonkeys/

(in reply to TulliusDetritus)
Post #: 1290
Page:   <<   < prev  41 42 [43] 44 45   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: 1943 August 23 Page: <<   < prev  41 42 [43] 44 45   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

0.146