Matrix Games Forums

Deal of the Week Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations WOTYCommand: Modern Air/Naval Operations WOTY is now available!Frontline : The Longest Day Announced and in Beta!Command gets Wargame of the Year EditionDeal of the Week: Pandora SeriesPandora: Eclipse of Nashira is now availableDistant Worlds Gets another updateHell is Approaching Deal of the Week Battle Academy Battle Academy 2 Out now!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Battle for Korea

 
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: Battle for Korea Page: <<   < prev  127 128 [129] 130 131   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/3/2014 1:44:24 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 7155
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
1072 is magic number for Port 3. You have more than enough.

_____________________________


(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3841
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/3/2014 1:49:04 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 5134
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

1072 is magic number for Port 3. You have more than enough.


Thanks! How do you make that out? Are you looking at 20.1.2.2 SHIP REARMAMENT AT PORTS TABLE?

I just canīt figure it out!

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 3842
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/3/2014 1:58:23 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 7155
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

Thanks! How do you make that out? Are you looking at 20.1.2.2 SHIP REARMAMENT AT PORTS TABLE?

I just canīt figure it out!


Yes I am (pg 285). The 16in/50 Mk 7 says the Reload cost is 5400. Go over to the Port-3 column, it shows the NS needed is 1072. For those size shells, you need lots and lots of NS until you get the port up to size 7.

_____________________________


(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3843
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/3/2014 2:02:49 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 5134
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
Aaah, I understand now. I got confused by the column saying Port-X + Navsupport. I thought I had to add some value to the port in order to get the right numbers.

Thanks for clearing it up for me!

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 3844
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/3/2014 2:04:20 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 7155
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
I'll add the consultant fee to your tab.

_____________________________


(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3845
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/3/2014 2:07:31 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 5134
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
If you manage to get the bill past the polar beers Iīll make sure you get your payment!

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 3846
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/3/2014 3:50:06 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 2941
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

If you manage to get the bill past the polar beers Iīll make sure you get your payment!


Past some of these? Doesn't look so hard....

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3847
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/3/2014 3:58:08 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 5134
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 3848
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/3/2014 4:55:45 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 14803
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
As a game mechanics issue, do remember that ports have ops points also. AFAIK the bigger the port, the more they have. So, even if 16" guns can be reloaded there on account of the needed naval support being present, you won't know until you try just how many turns it will take to reload how many ships with 16" guns. And that will be influenced by what other port activity is taking place.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3849
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/3/2014 5:26:44 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 2941
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

As a game mechanics issue, do remember that ports have ops points also. AFAIK the bigger the port, the more they have. So, even if 16" guns can be reloaded there on account of the needed naval support being present, you won't know until you try just how many turns it will take to reload how many ships with 16" guns. And that will be influenced by what other port activity is taking place.


You've got the engineers and the supply. I'd just build the port.

Also that's more VPs ;).

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 3850
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/3/2014 5:30:49 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 14803
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs

As a game mechanics issue, do remember that ports have ops points also. AFAIK the bigger the port, the more they have. So, even if 16" guns can be reloaded there on account of the needed naval support being present, you won't know until you try just how many turns it will take to reload how many ships with 16" guns. And that will be influenced by what other port activity is taking place.


You've got the engineers and the supply. I'd just build the port.

Also that's more VPs ;).

I'm reading both sides of this AAR these days, so I don't want to give advice, but I feel free to give technical/game engine types comments.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 3851
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/3/2014 5:32:45 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 5134
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
Thanks witpqs. Good info. As soon as the forts flip to the next level Iīll get started on the port. its (6) port so it should be fast getting it there with some 2500 engineers.

(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 3852
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/3/2014 9:58:58 PM   
zuluhour


Posts: 3100
Joined: 1/20/2011
From: Maryland
Status: offline
Dumb question, when can the AEs rearm at sea?

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3853
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/3/2014 10:23:59 PM   
EHansen


Posts: 263
Joined: 12/6/2013
Status: online
It should be 1/1/45 but only small caliber ammo, mostly AA ammo.

(in reply to zuluhour)
Post #: 3854
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/4/2014 12:26:17 AM   
zuluhour


Posts: 3100
Joined: 1/20/2011
From: Maryland
Status: offline
Thanks! I read up a little as well. I pick up the "manual" to check out "A" and become mesmerized by thought "B" and end up forgetting what I opened it for in the first place. and besides the darn thing is fragile now. It was kind of vague though, something like "late war". 

(in reply to EHansen)
Post #: 3855
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/4/2014 2:52:27 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 5134
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
I think its only up to 5 inch by sea. Might be wrong though!

(in reply to zuluhour)
Post #: 3856
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/4/2014 5:26:23 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 5134
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
26th June -45
______________________________________________________________________________

Quite turn. Which was good because Iīm too tired to really report much! Man work is exhausting!

------------------------
Korea
------------------------

Nothing to report. Usual bombings at Gunzan and bombardment at Masan.

------------------------
China
------------------------

Nothing to report.

Well, that it. More action to come in two days. Promise!

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3857
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/5/2014 5:17:08 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 5134
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
27th June -45
______________________________________________________________________________

Things seem to loosen up in Korea.

------------------------
Korea
------------------------

All of the sudden the 4Es starts to get some good shots in. Despite Thunderstorms even!

quote:

Morning Air attack on Gunzan , at 102,52

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid detected at 80 NM, estimated altitude 12,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 34 minutes

Allied aircraft
Liberator B.VI x 12
Liberator GR.VI x 3
B-24J Liberator x 12
A-26B Invader x 28
B-24D1 Liberator x 12
B-24J Liberator x 3
B-25J11 Mitchell x 12
P-38J Lightning x 18
P-38L Lightning x 62
PB4Y-1 Liberator x 15
PB4Y-2 Privateer x 41


Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 1 damaged
A-26B Invader: 1 damaged
B-25J11 Mitchell: 1 damaged
PB4Y-1 Liberator: 1 damaged
PB4Y-2 Privateer: 2 damaged


Japanese ground losses:
315 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 15 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 23 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on 19th Division, at 102,52 (Gunzan)

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid detected at 71 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 24 minutes

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 145
P-38L Lightning x 2


Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 3 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
530 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 16 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 61 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 9 disabled
Guns lost 18 (1 destroyed, 17 disabled)



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on 23rd Division, at 102,52 (Gunzan)

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid detected at 67 NM, estimated altitude 7,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 23 minutes

Allied aircraft
B-24J Liberator x 34

Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 1 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
324 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 13 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 16 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Vehicles lost 1 (1 destroyed, 0 disabled)




We finish the day with a good ground bombardment. No allied losses at all!

quote:

Ground combat at Gunzan (102,52)

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 108476 troops, 2030 guns, 3366 vehicles, Assault Value = 4995

Defending force 210406 troops, 2494 guns, 728 vehicles, Assault Value = 7019

Japanese ground losses:
964 casualties reported
Squads: 9 destroyed, 74 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 7 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 5 disabled
Guns lost 20 (5 destroyed, 15 disabled)
Vehicles lost 4 (2 destroyed, 2 disabled)


Might be able to do an deliberate here again soon. Iīll wait for a few days while I sort out some other stuff...stay tuned!

------------------------
China
------------------------

Mopping up continues all around China. After three days of fighting at Wuchang the defenders start to crumble.

quote:

Ground combat at Wuchang (84,51)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 12127 troops, 176 guns, 130 vehicles, Assault Value = 482

Defending force 6111 troops, 67 guns, 10 vehicles, Assault Value = 163

Allied adjusted assault: 205

Japanese adjusted defense: 81

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

Allied Assault reduces fortifications to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), forts(+), preparation(-), experience(-)
supply(-)

Attacker: leaders(+), leaders(-) Uhm. Okay...

Japanese ground losses:
638 casualties reported
Squads: 4 destroyed, 39 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 3 destroyed, 3 disabled
Guns lost 12 (1 destroyed, 11 disabled)


Allied ground losses:
22 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled


------------------------
Startegic Bombing
------------------------

Missions again the HI refuse to fly for the 3rd day in a row. B29-1 strike at some LI in Korea taking out 22 LI. No NFs encountered.


(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3858
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/6/2014 5:18:08 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 5134
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
Too tired to do the update tonight. Some interesting things coming up tomorrow though. Last Allied amphibious OP of the war.

Stay tuned for tomorrow. TGIF...

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3859
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/6/2014 5:39:42 PM   
koniu

 

Posts: 2204
Joined: 2/28/2011
From: Konin, Poland, European Union
Status: offline
Kaishu? or maybe HI

PS. Don`t tell it will be surprise

< Message edited by koniu -- 3/6/2014 6:41:31 PM >


_____________________________

"Only the Dead Have Seen the End of War"

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3860
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/6/2014 7:16:54 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 5134
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
Nothing so grand Iīm afraid! With 8000 AV in Korea I donīt have much to spare!

(in reply to koniu)
Post #: 3861
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/6/2014 7:26:17 PM   
Lowpe

 

Posts: 2515
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: online
How can you play this long and not invade the Home Islands??

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3862
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/6/2014 10:47:44 PM   
princep01

 

Posts: 937
Joined: 8/7/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline
Lowpe, perhaps it is coming yet, but maybe he hasn't invaded because, like the real thing, the Allies won without invading the HI. And, my friend, that was a good thing for both Japan and the Allies, particularly the USA. The slaughter and human suffering would have been immense.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3863
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/7/2014 9:41:45 AM   
paullus99


Posts: 1610
Joined: 1/23/2002
Status: online
certainly would have been worse for Japan, in the short term (and probably long term). Pretty much would guarantee a level of damage at least a magnitude higher than they endured historically, plus I'm sure that Hirohito would have been hung as well, as a war criminal - with all of those implications to post-war Japanese life.

_____________________________

Never Underestimate the Power of a Small Tactical Nuclear Weapon...

(in reply to princep01)
Post #: 3864
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/7/2014 2:11:38 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 5134
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

How can you play this long and not invade the Home Islands??


It was either Korea or the HI. Where doesnīt really matter as long as there is a level 9 AF within normal B17/24 range of the HI. If I could do it again I would probably have landed on the HI instead. Didnīt realize Erik could rail the entire Manchuria garrison to Korea. I bet there are fewer IDs on the HI then Manchuria...

Live and learn.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 3865
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/7/2014 4:26:44 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 5134
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
28th-29th June -45
______________________________________________________________________________

The 29th of June 1945 will be known as the day of the last Allied Amphibious landing of the war...

------------------------
Korea
------------------------

I donīt know but bombardments here seems to cause wildly fluctuating results. One day Iīm causing 200-300 casualties only to have results like this the day after:

quote:

Morning Air attack on Gunzan , at 102,52

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid detected at 80 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 34 minutes

Allied aircraft
Liberator B.VI x 12
B-24J Liberator x 167
P-38J Lightning x 2
P-38L Lightning x 71
F6F-5 Hellcat x 33
PB4Y-1 Liberator x 12
PB4Y-2 Privateer x 46


Allied aircraft losses
B-24J Liberator: 6 damaged
PB4Y-2 Privateer: 2 damaged


Japanese ground losses:
1320 casualties reported
Squads: 4 destroyed, 94 disabled
Non Combat: 4 destroyed, 78 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 14 disabled
Vehicles lost 36 (8 destroyed, 28 disabled)


Airbase hits 8
Airbase supply hits 4
Runway hits 40


Not sure whats causing these fluctuations. I canīt imagine Erik letting troops go into the hex on move mode.

Bombardments on the ground are showing some really nice results too.

quote:

Ground combat at Gunzan (102,52)

Allied Bombardment attack

Attacking force 109018 troops, 2032 guns, 3371 vehicles, Assault Value = 5046

Defending force 208376 troops, 2602 guns, 971 vehicles, Assault Value = 7096

Japanese ground losses:
923 casualties reported
Squads: 6 destroyed, 51 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 7 disabled
Guns lost 40 (6 destroyed, 34 disabled)
Vehicles lost 15 (7 destroyed, 8 disabled
)


Despite all the damage Iīm causing Eriks troops are still hovering around 7k. So Iīm barely keeping up with recovery. Its just so much troops even casualties like this are not dangerous. Hopefully his DIS is starting to rise though.

I also have a small surprise planned in three or four days...

------------------------
China
------------------------

So, nothing too exotic in our last Amphib OPS. We are landing at Ningpo (see map). There is good reason for that which can also been seen in the map. Resistance is already wiped out by 4Es flying from Naha and the naval bombardment. The 3rd RGC Division must have been almost completely wiped out earlier because after this attack and two other causing two digit losses it was completely wiped off the map.

Base will be secured tomorrow by the 8th Indian ID and the 3rd OZ ID. D+2 will see a full Army land. These are the troops that earlier cleared HK and Canton.

quote:

Afternoon Air attack on 3rd RGC Division, at 92,56 (Ningpo)

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid spotted at 20 NM, estimated altitude 9,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 6 minutes

Allied aircraft
Liberator B.VI x 6
B-24J Liberator x 7
B-24J Liberator x 31
PB4Y-1 Liberator x 8


No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
399 casualties reported
Squads: 26 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 22 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 8 (6 destroyed, 2 disabled)


We continue mop up operations all over China. Only thing holding us back right now is supply. Two 500k convoys are due to arrive within 14 days and a smaller 200k convoy will arrive in just 4 days. That convoy has been running at flank speed for over a week now and I had to dispatch oilers to refuel it.

------------------------
Strategic Bombing
------------------------

On the 28th we tried to hit another NF factory at Nagoya. This was a costly mission as over 20 B29s were lost for only 4 points of damage to the factories. This was the last B29 raid from Luzon. B29s will now rebase to Moppo. Its a bit of a risk but Iīm willing to take it if I can get the B29 losses down even the slightest.

------------------------
Air War
------------------------

Erik has completely withdrawn from Korea, China and Singapore. Fighters have concentrated in Tokyo (1400) and Hiroshima (600).

------------------------
Allied Fleet
------------------------

Reinforcements continue to trickle in. Antietam, Cowpens and 4 CVEs rejoin the fleet.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by JocMeister -- 3/7/2014 5:35:55 PM >

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3866
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/8/2014 5:26:57 AM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 5134
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
1st July -45
______________________________________________________________________________

We are now in position for my little surprise in Korea...

------------------------
Korea
------------------------

Well, Erik is not the only one who can pile on stuff. Bringing in every available reserve I have including pulling some IDs from China and the DEI I have now managed to sneak in 3000 more AV at Gunzan. This means that the next DA I will actually have a 1000 AV advantage rather then a 2000 disadvantage. I hope that will tip the balance in favor or my troops. I will also launch some heavy naval bombardments from 9 slow BBs.

Interestingly enough Erik has inched his SCTFs closer to Korea. Earlier he has made sure he is at least 8 hexes out from possible allied CV strikes. He has now moved closer and is only 7 hexes from Moppo That can only mean he will try to hit Moppo again. If he does he will find a very unpleasant surprise there...

The entire allied SCTF fleet (minus the CV protection) is currently at Moppo. Most of the heavy guns will bombard Gunzan but 2 Iowas, 5 modern CAs and 12 Clevelands and over 200 DDs are on station to guard against just such a thing. There are also some 600 mines, 200 PT boats and about 100 subs patrolling the waters. And if he ends up within 3 hexes of Moppo at daybreak 400 TBs and 200 DBs are ready to attack.

If Erik comes he will come with everything including the KB + LBA. So Iīm going to stand down some of the sweeps and make sure I have a solid CAP up. Iīm also going to fly in the P47Ns that have been resting at Naha.

Whatever happens tomorrow it will be a really interesting turn!

------------------------
China
------------------------

Looks like Erik is keeping most of the superstack at the CMAs location. Only 3 IDs are moving towards Shanghai. They were hit pretty heavy from the air this turn.

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on 60th Division, at 88,55 , near Chuhsien

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid spotted at 39 NM, estimated altitude 12,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 13 minutes

Allied aircraft
Liberator B.VI x 12
Liberator GR.VI x 5
B-24J Liberator x 20
B-17E Fortress x 3
B-17F Fortress x 10
B-24D1 Liberator x 9
B-24J Liberator x 101
PB4Y-1 Liberator x 17


No Allied losses

Japanese ground losses:
1612 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 76 disabled
Non Combat: 7 destroyed, 98 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 12 disabled


Also attacking 133rd Division ...
Also attacking 3rd Ind.Mixed Brigade ...
Also attacking 161st Division ...
Also attacking 20th Army ...
Also attacking Southern Army ...
Also attacking 54th Infantry Brigade ...
Also attacking 71st Ind.Mixed Brigade ...
Also attacking 84th Ind.Mixed Brigade ...
Also attacking 26th Engineer Regiment ...
Also attacking 2nd JAAF Base Force ...
Also attacking 2nd Ind.Infantry Brigade ...
Also attacking 88th Infantry Brigade ...
Also attacking 10th Special Base Force ...
Also attacking 4th Air Army ...
Also attacking 35th JAAF AF Bn ...
Also attacking 72nd Ind.Mixed Brigade ...
Also attacking 33rd Army ...
Also attacking 20th Engineer Regiment ...
Also attacking 10th Special Base Force ...
Also attacking Kure 2nd SNLF ...
Also attacking 10th Special Base Force ...
Also attacking 60th Division ...
Also attacking 15th Naval Guard Unit ...
Also attacking 161st Division ...
Also attacking 133rd Division ...
Also attacking 60th Division ...
Also attacking 133rd Division ...
Also attacking 60th Division ...

Also attacking 10th Special Base Force ...
Also attacking 133rd Division ...
Also attacking 10th Special Base Force ...
Also attacking 60th Division ...
Also attacking 133rd Division ...

Also attacking 10th Special Base Force ...
Also attacking 60th Division ...
Also attacking 10th Special Base Force ...
Also attacking 60th Division ...
Also attacking 10th Special Base Force ...
Also attacking 60th Division ...
Also attacking 161st Division ...

Also attacking 26th Engineer Regiment ...
Also attacking 72nd Ind.Mixed Brigade ...
Also attacking 10th Special Base Force ...
Also attacking Kure 2nd SNLF ...



These guys wonīt be able to hold Hangchow against us. Nowhere close to. The landing troops have started to move inland while the 2nd wave will land tomorrow. I havnīt counted the exact number of AV but its around 3000.

------------------------
Strategic Bombing
------------------------

B24s hit Keijo at day taking out a large chunk of HI/LI.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3867
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/8/2014 6:41:30 AM   
morejeffs

 

Posts: 136
Joined: 4/24/2013
Status: offline
Wow...Time for some ultra violence!

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3868
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/8/2014 7:19:15 AM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 5134
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
Indeed, having looked more closely at the actual turn file Iīm pretty convinced Erik will try something in the coming days. Perhaps even next turn. He has moved a big chunk of his AF forward too. Hopefully he will go through with it. The sheer number of TFs protects Moppo with numbers alone. He will either run out of ammo or OPS long before he can reach the AF. And if he runs out of OPS which is likely he will lose whatever he sent in in the morning.

I moved the CV fleet closer to Moppo. This will leave the Amphibs at Ningpo exposed but the will unload the troops during the night and after that I donīt have more need of them anyway if Erik sinks a few. I canīt fly much from Shanghai. Probably because supply is bad. I havnīt even bothered with closing the AF.


(in reply to morejeffs)
Post #: 3869
RE: Battle for Korea - 3/8/2014 11:38:04 AM   
paullus99


Posts: 1610
Joined: 1/23/2002
Status: online
Perhaps the decisive turn of the war coming up......

_____________________________

Never Underestimate the Power of a Small Tactical Nuclear Weapon...

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3870
Page:   <<   < prev  127 128 [129] 130 131   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Battle for Korea Page: <<   < prev  127 128 [129] 130 131   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

0.172