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: No fleet, no problem...

 
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: No fleet, no problem... Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/9/2013 3:20:15 AM   
floydg

 

Posts: 1784
Joined: 6/27/2004
From: Middletown, NJ
Status: online
Agreed on Dutch Harbor as well. No idea why I didn't build up the other bases, but you see my pattern.

At least I left you a decent position in China and lots of PP...

(in reply to princep01)
Post #: 91
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/9/2013 4:05:01 AM   
Cribtop


Posts: 3416
Joined: 8/10/2008
From: Lone Star Nation
Status: online
Imagine if Nemo could actually play a game AS the Soviets. His style would be even more terrifying if he had the expendable Eastern Hordes at his disposal.

I will second his recommendation of the Imperial War Museum. My college roommate and I broke off from a planned tour of something dreadful to hit the museum for a day. Truly awesome! Even better was lunch at a nearby pub. A roaring fire, Bitters, Bangers and Mash, Leather high back chairs, and a bar with actual sailors caps from the freaking Battle of Trafalgar hung behind it. Wow.

_____________________________

Follow my latest AAR as I do battle with our resident author Cuttlefish at: http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2742735

(in reply to floydg)
Post #: 92
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/9/2013 7:35:52 AM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 2151
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

princep01,

No, not out of line at all. No I'm not British, I'm Irish although, obviously, we're all Europeans now with our socialism, our green subsidies and faltering economies . We're uniting just in time to slip into senescence .

If you're in London you have to pass by the Imperial War Museum ( it is currently closed for renovation ;-( ). Inside it is very crowded and there isn't enough space to, in my mind, show the exhibits off to best effect but it is cool to see the He-162 and, most importantly, the naval guns outside. The one on the right - as you stand in front of them - is a 15 incher that came from HMS Ramillies which is cool as it is in-game. You can also visit HMS Belfast (in-game CL ) in London and Duxford is cool if you like planes .If tanks are more your bag then Bovington's the place to be.


There is also a regimental museum in Edinburgh Castle with lots of AFVs, guns and captured enemy equipment.

Princep could also check when the Farnbourgh Air Show is on - it's one of the biggest in the world.

As for GB in general, you could spend five years there and barely scratch the history that surrounds you. E.g. in London there is a functioning hospital that was initially constructed in the 1400s! That is amazing to North Americans whose buildings are usually replaced every 50-100 years.

_____________________________

I have not yet begun to fight! OTOH I have not yet begun to flee. Hmmmmm - choices, choices -always with the choices.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 93
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/9/2013 10:49:51 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Hehe, yeah the university I lecture in was founded in 1592 and my childhood home was a three storey house built in the 1880s complete with a bullet hole from the 1916 rising. We know from the records but also from the fact that when we were stripping back the paintwork we found graffiti from workmen dated from the 1880s. My medical school was used as a redoubt during the 1916 rising and in honour of the rising the bullet holes on the facade and within the outermost rooms facing the square the rebels retreated across have never been repaired.

LOTS of history everywhere in Europe.

And now onto the alternate history of 30th August 1942.

Aleutians:
Quiet, too damn quiet. Attu is up around 400 AV, Adak has about 150 AV with a US Army Regt 3 days out. Adak island is 67% of the way to a Level 1 airfield after just 1 day of construction ( It has about 200+ engineer equivalents there now ) and Amchitka is building more slowly as it is less crucial and received fewer troops.

In other news I am now happy with the minefields around Attu and am beginning to build minefields around Amchitka.

I've stood down all my PBYs as I wish to use them to airlift in my airmobile units and they need 3 days for all their planes to be repaired. I'm just guessing but I have a feeling that the Aleutians are about to be hit. I have very carefully NOT searched the most obvious route for the IJN ( south-west of Attu ) but as of tomorrow am devoting a single Catalina squadron to searching this area. If the Japanese are there being spotted should trigger their run-in to their target.

The USN is still in terrible shape with very little of the damage from the disastrous naval massacre 10 days ago having been repaired but I've concentrated my efforts on getting cumulative damage down to under 10 points per ship. Anything with less than 10 points of cumulative damage is at sea and waiting for the IJN while other ships are waiting at the pierside in Dutch harbour having already refuelled and resupplied so that they can slip anchor at any moment ready to race to Adak --- and from there to either Amchitka or Attu.

So, battle-damaged US ships vs more, better and undamaged Japanese ships + CVs. Should be fun. Either way I should get to do a lot of damage to KB. I've got a LOT of fighters in the Aleutians.


In a very Soviet way I'm a HUGE fan of airmobile forces and thus I brought along a US cavalry regiment, a USMC parachute regiment and whatever raider units I could find. When the time comes I should be able to fly a Regiment a day into whichever base is invaded. This means that if I can hold for the first day then I have a very good chance of just swamping the invaders in airmobile infantry. Attu and Adak should survive the first day but Amchitka will fall if attacked. That's ok as Amchitka is sandwiched between two of my bases and would make good bombing training AND a nice lure to use up the IJN's fuel.

Today I have sent back the first empty xAKs to Prince Rupert where they will begin picking up the remaining forces in CONUSA for deployment in the Aleutians.


Oz:
the IJA is shock attacking at Carnarvon trying to retake the town so it can send in transports to extract the 1.5 divisions there. I'm just trying to hold on to the town. In the long run the IJN will extract this 1.5 divisions to safety as I have sent the entire navy to Burma via Colombo. The key is Darwin where I am beginning to concentrate forces from all over Australia and build a much larger ground army than had hitherto been employed in this sector. Darwin is pretty much doomed.

One of my DDs did its job. It was trapped between PM and Darwin in an isolated allied base so on its way out I had it show its snout around Darwin. It stayed out of Val range and survived the inevitable Betty sortie - DDs on their own usually do while Vals kill them with ease - and is now on its way out of the area and back to the safety of Melbourne. This should force Damian to keep surface combatants in the DEI and Darwin to prevent my raiders slipping in and it cost me nothing. Win, Win!


China:
Damian slaughtered 3 Corps of Chinese units in move mode *DOH!*. Elsewhere my plans for southern China are moving along nicely. He is strategic bombing more heavily now - which is fine since the Burma road should be open soon enough.


Burma:
I sacrificed 6 xAKLs in order to land more supplies at Ramree. I got enough supplies ashore that all of my ground units are now fully supplied and the base has a little extra. That's Ramree sorted until it gets a Level 1 airfield. When it hits Level 1 he'll bomb it to dust and I will get to pick and choose the days I LRCAP from Akyab. He'll have to escort every day while I'll get to pick and choose when I intervene. I've been testing it recently and I normally do quite well vs his Oscars plus every Oscar lost is also a lost pilot ( since they are lost over my base ).


Central Pacific:
I'm about two weeks away from having a suitable airmobile island hopping force ready in the Central and Southern Pacific. My plan is to combine USMC parachutists with sub-landed raiders and airmobile Combat Engineer Bns + Aviation support only Aviation Engineer units to create an extempore airmobile Regiment which I will use to:
a) take isolated IJA bases which he has left unoccupied by airdrop/sub landing and
b) rapidly fly in combat engineers and the aviation support build them up so they can house fighters, bombers etc
c) under cover of the fighters I can then slip shipping in to bring more troops, supplies etc.
d) repeat the "great leap forward" using vertical envelopment.

Ideally I'll use these airmobile infantry units in very doctrinal roles to vertically envelope the enemy thus dislocating their front and allowing me to use manoeuvre to advance against a far stronger enemy whilst actually largely avoiding direct confrontation. This would, IMO, be a doctrinally sound example of the application of Deep Battle to the Pacific albeit on a small scale.

I won't launch this until Damian is well and truly stuck into the Aleutians, Darwin and Ramree Island as I wish to wait until he is involved in a multitude of fronts, each of which requires major commitment of the IJN, before I open up this new front and complicate his strategic picture. These vertical envelopments are my asymetrical way of pinning the IJN in the south and central Pacific. The IJN surface combatants and KB are his arm of decision and thus must be negated as per Deep Battle.

At roughly the same time ( although perhaps a little later ) the threat in southern China should become evident - this is my symmetrical pinning of his strategic reserves. I envision this as being the culmination of the doctrine of engaging him through his operational and strategic depth and pinning his strategic reserves such that they cannot interfere with any breakthrough operation.


I estimate that everything else he has in the IJA is going to be scrambling to create a cohesive defensive line and will, at best, be sent to create local and operational reserves. So, if I pin the IJA in China and prevent him pulling troops out I can rob him of the ability to form a strategic reserve of sufficient mass to achieve strategically decisive results through counter-invasion/reinforcement of threatened sectors.

Obviously there's some mixing of scales etc there and one cannot quite divide the IJA and IJN capabilities/reserves so easily but I put the equivalences down in order to demonstrate how this is all really Deep Battle, again.... and to provide a framework for people to follow the thinking.

< Message edited by Nemo121 -- 5/9/2013 10:57:50 PM >


_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 94
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/10/2013 1:24:05 AM   
desicat

 

Posts: 306
Joined: 5/25/2008
Status: online
Since you don't plan on using your CV's offensively it would be a legendary accomplishment if you took out the KB in a surface engagement. ADM Oldendorf would volunteer to lead....

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 95
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/10/2013 12:24:04 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
It would but it is so unlikely it isn't something I'd bother trying to bring about. No, my plan is to use manoeuvre to negate his CVs most of the time and sneakiness and a land-based CAP shield to negate them whenever I have to operate where they are.


Quick question: I have an RN CV that has to be withdrawn in a few days but it is sitting in a harbour in Australia with something like 70 flotation damage. As such there's no way I can get it to wherever it needs to be to withdraw for several months and I don't want to pay the cost in PP to keep it.

As far as I can see my only way out is to scuttle the ship to avoid the cost in PPs - this is one reason I dislike playing with withdrawals on. It leads to crazy, stupid binary decisions like this. ANyways, just wondering if anyone is aware of some other way around this.

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to desicat)
Post #: 96
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/10/2013 12:48:00 PM   
bbbf

 

Posts: 492
Joined: 7/16/2000
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline
She can withdraw from Sydney - but I believe you need to get below 50 total damage to do so.

_____________________________

Robert Lee

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 97
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/10/2013 8:29:04 PM   
Capt. Harlock


Posts: 4039
Joined: 9/15/2001
From: Los Angeles
Status: offline
quote:

As far as I can see my only way out is to scuttle the ship to avoid the cost in PPs - this is one reason I dislike playing with withdrawals on. It leads to crazy, stupid binary decisions like this.


If it helps, think of this as scrapping a ship too heavily damaged to be worth repairing. It actually did happen historically.

_____________________________

Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?

--Victor Hugo

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 98
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/10/2013 11:57:33 PM   
floydg

 

Posts: 1784
Joined: 6/27/2004
From: Middletown, NJ
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

It would but it is so unlikely it isn't something I'd bother trying to bring about. No, my plan is to use manoeuvre to negate his CVs most of the time and sneakiness and a land-based CAP shield to negate them whenever I have to operate where they are.


Quick question: I have an RN CV that has to be withdrawn in a few days but it is sitting in a harbour in Australia with something like 70 flotation damage. As such there's no way I can get it to wherever it needs to be to withdraw for several months and I don't want to pay the cost in PP to keep it.

As far as I can see my only way out is to scuttle the ship to avoid the cost in PPs - this is one reason I dislike playing with withdrawals on. It leads to crazy, stupid binary decisions like this. ANyways, just wondering if anyone is aware of some other way around this.


Yeah, that was a tough one for me. I tried to get her sunk, since it would take too long to get her to Cape Town. I was trying to build up Perth so you can withdraw from there, but not with that level of damage.

And I agree, the withdrawal rules led to me getting several other British ships intentionally sunk.


(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 99
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/11/2013 2:17:13 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
1st September 1942:

Well, I'd say this is it. My B-17s spotted a gaggle of ships including at least one CV. Sure their naval search skill is pretty crap but this makes sense. The location is interesting. It looks to me like he might be going for Adak in order to isolate Attu.

I'm responding by beginning to airlift the US Cavalry Regiment and USMC Parachute Battalion into Adak. I've decided not to reinforce Amchitka further. I'd rather be sure of holding Attu and Adak than try to hold all three and lose Amchitka AND Adak. I can lose EITHER Amchitka or Adak and still maintain my airbridge to Attu but if I lose both I lose everything west of Dutch Harbour - which is now a bit over 1,000 AV - and I can't afford that.

So, reinforcements to Adak, including a horde of fighters as that base has just become a Level 1 airfield. I'm overstacking but brute strength is more important than efficiency right now.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to floydg)
Post #: 100
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/11/2013 2:20:21 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
1st September, Oz:

So, since he is about to make his move it is time to really begin pinning him elsewhere.

In Oz I have 1.33 IJA Divisions pinned at Carnarvon and on the route to Darwin I have 1.66 divisions in range. I have 2 Brigades to bring to bear at Carnarvon before I'll attack but at Darwin I have enough to attack today and so that's ordered.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 101
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/11/2013 2:28:54 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Burma:

And here's a major mistake. Damian attacks into Myitkina. He brings a lot of combat power but between the terrain, the fortifications, the disruption due to crossing the river my forces hold.

I've suckered him in but unfortunately I drew in more combat power than I'd bargained for. No matter, I had only committed 1/3rd of my transports in the area to fly in reinforcements. From tomorrow the entire transport force will be committed to flying reinforcements in.

If he gives me two days while he recovers disruption I'll boost my defending AV by 50% and should be fine to hold out indefinitely.... In the meantime 900+ AV are over half-way through the jungle behind and to the west of the Japanese attackers cutting them off from the remainder of the IJA in central Burma.


At Ramree he has switched to bombing ground units.... BIG mistake. The ground units at Ramree don't matter, what matters is whether or not I can build a Level 1 airfield. Once I have that I'll be able to protect the influx of supplies and reinforcements and that'll be my objective completed.


So, things should really hot up over the next couple of days. I've sortied the USN and they are all sitting north and east of the Aleutian islands within reaction range of the 3 islands I hold under highly aggressive and competent commanders with orders to intervene the instant enemy transports are spotted. Given the mess I inherited a week ago I'm fairly pleased with how things are turning out - far too many of the USN combatants still have major combat damage but I've managed to rustle up a lot of DDs from the south Pacific and 2 additional BBs which will be arriving over the next 4 days so if I can blunt the initial landing I'll be in good shape to engage in meaningful naval and aerial attrition over the next 10 days.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 102
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/11/2013 3:29:28 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
2nd September:
The IJA 33rd Division is, to all intents and purposes, destroyed as a combat force south of Darwin. This should greatly aid in the capture of Darwin.

Ground combat at 76,129 (near Katherine)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 19782 troops, 398 guns, 296 vehicles, Assault Value = 903

Defending force 8287 troops, 95 guns, 16 vehicles, Assault Value = 185

Allied adjusted assault: 169

Japanese adjusted defense: 58

Allied assault odds: 2 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: leaders(+), disruption(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
3462 casualties reported
Squads: 63 destroyed, 46 disabled
Non Combat: 100 destroyed, 10 disabled
Engineers: 5 destroyed, 5 disabled
Guns lost 39 (18 destroyed, 21 disabled)
Vehicles lost 5 (2 destroyed, 3 disabled)
Units retreated 1

Allied ground losses:
409 casualties reported
Squads: 6 destroyed, 24 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled

Defeated Japanese Units Retreating!

Assaulting units:
641st Towed Tank Destroyer Battalion
32nd Infantry Division
8th Australian Brigade
15th Australian Brigade
1st Australian Brigade
2nd Australian Brigade
17th MG Battalion
22nd Australian Brigade
108th Tank Attack Regiment
II Australian
1st Medium Regiment
223rd Field Artillery Battalion
2nd Medium Regiment

Defending units:
33rd Division


Around Attu for some reason one of my transport TFs didn't run to Dutch Harbour as ordered and drew some airstrikes from KB. Overall I destroyed about a dozen Vals and 5 or 6 Zeroes in return for no more then 3 or 4 Wildcats while 6 of my ships took damaging bombs hits. Most of them should survive as I'll simply dock them at Adak and dare him to lose the 20 or 30 planes a port attack would cost him.

Unfortunately for me the SC-270 radars of the two USAAF Base Forces on Adak were not offloaded before the TF had to flee so the effectiveness of the CAP in stopping strikes is greatly reduced.


So, overall, KB unmasks but not in massive strength. Over the next day or two any invasion TF which is on the way should show up and then I'll be able to say with certainty where Damian is aiming to land. I'm quite sure there's an invasion on the way since I have spotted multiple escorts moving from mainland Japan south of the Kuriles in recent days and just today found a huge TF including at least a half-dozen CMs - the sort of force you use to saw minefields to protect an island you've just taken from counter-bombardment.

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 103
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/12/2013 3:00:40 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
2nd September:

Today was a quiet day. KB has disappeared ( which I think means it has moved north of Adak island and out of my naval search zones - which I've now reset to provide some coverage in this area ) but most of my SC TFs north of Adak were spotted by enemy Vals on search missions so I know it is still around Adak island. I'm responding by running most of my TFs back to Dutch Harbour where they will automatically disband. He can strike and hurt them if he wants BUT it'll cost him a lot of Vals and Kates and while many ships would be damaged very few should sink - given that this is just about to become a Level 6 harbour with a huge number of naval support points, multiple ADs, ARs etc. It is a calculated risk though, I'm accepting the possibility of some damage and sinkings instead of taking the risk of leaving the ships at sea and either getting away with no damage or having them spotted and all sunk.

In Burma my LRCAP of Ramree worked like a charm and I downed about 20 Vals, 10 medium bombers and another 10 fighters. I lost about 10 of my own fighters in return. End result for the day was 15 Allied losses around the whole map for 45 Japanese planes. Tomorrow my fighters will pull back to CAP Akyab again.

I've also decided that the Allies MUST take and hold Cocos Islands in order to provide a refuelling station between Oz and India. Right now the Royal Navy is being slowed terribly in its journey from Oz to India since it can only cruise along at a fuel-efficient speed since there's no refuelling possible. If I have the Cocos islands in my hands and 30,000 tons of fuel there then I could run BBs and CAs and even DDs at full speed and cut the transit time in half - which will be important when I have to shift naval forces from India to Oz and vice versa in future. One Brigade of troops, a coastal defence battery an RN Base Force and a US EAB Bn are being moved to Cocos as we speak and will begin building it up.

Really we're just in a holding pattern for the next little while while KB does its thing and the USN tries to run and hide and survive until an amphibious TF comes into view.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 104
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/13/2013 2:40:33 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
on the 3rd September I spotted a number of ships in the Bay of Bengal. I didn't ID any CVs and so thought that they were surface raiders looking to hit my coastal convoys. Unfortunately for my flyers at Akyab I was wrong and these ships were a bombardment TF comprising fast BBs and CAs. I had Akyab slightly overstacked with about 240 planes there on a Level 4 airfield. Irrespective the bombardment was lethal with 157 planes destroyed on the ground and about 80 left in working condition.

Tomorrow I plan to LRCAP the base as I'm sure he'll send bombers in to destroy whats left.

In other news: The Royal Navy and elements of the USN from Oz are still making their way north.... This is painfully slow going but there was just no logistical preparation to support rapid deployment of forces between Oz and India. Remember everyone, the key to strategy is preparing the logistics. With mid-way refuelling at Cocos I could have had ships in place already to prevent this raid. As it is my next BB TF is about 6 days away.

In the north KB has sprinted north of Adak island. It seems Damian wanted to kill my raiders which he spotted the previous turn but I'd already pulled them all back to Dutch Harbour. As of tomorrow Dutch Harbour will host 4 BBs ( 2 of them fast BBs), 3 CAs and about 24 DDs. Anything with less than 20 cumulative damage is being redeployed to Dutch Harbour ready to interdict the amphibious landings I believe are coming.


So, nothing much happening, just waiting to see what appears in the waters west or south of the Aleutians over coming days. I'm moving one small DD TF westward into the area between the Kuriles and Aleutians to see if I can't get it into position to launch a surface attack on whatever amphibious TFs might appear.

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 105
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/13/2013 4:19:52 PM   
floydg

 

Posts: 1784
Joined: 6/27/2004
From: Middletown, NJ
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

In other news: The Royal Navy and elements of the USN from Oz are still making their way north.... This is painfully slow going but there was just no logistical preparation to support rapid deployment of forces between Oz and India. Remember everyone, the key to strategy is preparing the logistics. With mid-way refuelling at Cocos I could have had ships in place already to prevent this raid. As it is my next BB TF is about 6 days away.



I am taking careful notes. Clearly lots of things for me to learn.

Too bad about Akyab.


< Message edited by floydg -- 5/13/2013 4:20:17 PM >

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 106
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/13/2013 5:03:18 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Floyd,

Yeah I'm curious as to the lack of logistical preparation in the Pacific and off Java. Did he just push harder than you could pull back and therefore when he reached his culmination point you just didn't have enough forces to build up those bases or was it a deliberate choice? You had almost 6,000 PP so that was enough to buy out about 4 divisions so there was definitely enough to go into the Pacific if you wanted it.


As to the losses at Akyab. Yeah, it would have been nicer not to lose them but such is life. The trick is to have an equanimity about losing or winning such that it doesn't impact you emotionally or in terms of decision-making. When winning matters as little as losing, and vice versa then you're freed up to focus on the stuff that really matters. In this case I played that round unskillfully but tomorrow's a chance to roll the die again - I'm essentially creating my very own variable interval reward ratio endorphiniser

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to floydg)
Post #: 107
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/13/2013 5:49:46 PM   
floydg

 

Posts: 1784
Joined: 6/27/2004
From: Middletown, NJ
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

Floyd,

Yeah I'm curious as to the lack of logistical preparation in the Pacific and off Java. Did he just push harder than you could pull back and therefore when he reached his culmination point you just didn't have enough forces to build up those bases or was it a deliberate choice? You had almost 6,000 PP so that was enough to buy out about 4 divisions so there was definitely enough to go into the Pacific if you wanted it.


The problem I had was lack of transports. Once I had enough lift, I was intending to beef up that area. And I was also so afraid of moving stuff without appropriate air cover (after numerous disasters). All I had was CVE Long Island for air cover (you should have seen her by Pago Pago, which is where I was moving troops).

And yes, Damian did push way harder than I had expected (Suva, Pago Pago, New Caledonia, etc). I was able to retake Norfolk Island, but then lost steam when he stopped expanding there.

quote:


As to the losses at Akyab. Yeah, it would have been nicer not to lose them but such is life. The trick is to have an equanimity about losing or winning such that it doesn't impact you emotionally or in terms of decision-making. When winning matters as little as losing, and vice versa then you're freed up to focus on the stuff that really matters. In this case I played that round unskillfully but tomorrow's a chance to roll the die again - I'm essentially creating my very own variable interval reward ratio endorphiniser


Nice. That is something I could aspire to. Your mode of gameplay really opens my eyes to so many possibilities I would never have dreamed of. Watching you play it out is almost as satisfying playing it myself.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 108
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/14/2013 10:38:59 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
September 5th, 1942

A very strange day indeed. There was no bomber strike on Akyab to catch the 70 or so damaged fighters on the ground and there were precious few airstrikes anywhere else in Burma. I wonder if his bombers were grounded by bad weather? The lack of a follow-on punch to truly knock that force out is puzzling since I know Damian has learnt the lesson that that is needed in our previous games.

In the Aleutians his carriers have drifted westward to a position just north of Attu Island. A strike by some floatplanes waltzed through my CAP unmolested - which was rather amusing to see - while his naval search Vals and floatplanes were roughly handled by my CAP with about a half-dozen downed. This is all perfectly rational behaviour if there are amphibious TFs making for the Aleutians but my problem is that intensive naval search missions haven't spotted any amphibious TFs at all. In any case this lack of aggression means I'm going to sortie a small USN TF to cover a tanker convoy to Adak Island which I wish to establish as a possible refuelling base to support fast SC TFs darting into Attu Island overnight to disrupt possible amphibious TFs unloading there - again, logistics.

Floyd,
I think the Pacific will take care of itself as he cannot supply what he has taken while being pressed elsewhere. I'd say he's pulling back there already and with my subs involved in recon-push ops to ID weaknesses and the gathering of an extempore airmobile division for the task I think I'll be able to airbridge my way pretty much all the way to Truk over the next 2 to 3 months. This will threaten Noumea etc and render his holdings south of Truk irrelevant. That's the plan anyways, if he really wants to hold he can since the Allied fleet has been butchered and I cannot force through any opposed landings. I think though that there are enough gaps in his front that the time is right to show what airmobile forces can do.


You can't conduct appropriate military operations if you haven't put the appropriate logistical support in place. Right now I'm in the process of desperately trying to conduct operations without the proper logistical support. This means I am having to either forego operations or undertake them knowing they will suffer greater losses than would have been possible if the appropriate logistical support had been present. It is frustrating but being quiescent during this period of time would simply allow Damian to continue holding the initiative and, in my opinion, would condemn me to greater losses in the long term. As difficult as it seems for most people to believe I believe that by accepting high rates of casualties in a short time period as opposed to lower rates of casualties over much longer time periods the actual overall losses will be reduced. So, the landings at Ramree are actually designed to reduce Allied losses over time. I get a sense that a lot of people think there's a casualty insensitivity to these operations which is incorrect. The maths is that so long as the losses occurred in 2 to 3 weeks of the Ramree operation ( + supporting overland push into Burma ) are LESS than the losses my forces would incur over 5 to 6 months of intense jungle fighting to break into Burma overland without this amphibious support then the Ramree operation actually reduces casualties ---- with the caveat that casualties shouldn't be so intense as to force an operational pause which would delay future operations beyond the 6 month timescale. Montgomery will face this mathematics in North-West Europe in 1944 when British manpower reserves were pretty much tapped out and he could only rely on a small, set number of replacements per week with additional losses having to be made good by cannibalising existing units. He chose to accept greater overall casualties over a larger section of the front over a greater period of time in return for a lower per week rate of casualties among British troops. Patton, on the other hand, wanted an approach in which short, sharp bursts of activity resulted in very high rates of casualties for short periods of time but promised the ending of the war in a short period of time, necessitating only a few short pulses of activity which, overall, would have resulted in fewer Allied deaths before war's end. I always thought the majority of those who critiqued the Montgomery ( wide front ) vs Patton ( narrow thrust ) debate missed out this most crucial aspect of the debate. The Soviets would have liked Patton - once they got past all the past life shibboleths.

< Message edited by Nemo121 -- 5/14/2013 10:54:30 AM >


_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to floydg)
Post #: 109
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/14/2013 4:16:05 PM   
bigred


Posts: 2829
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
quote:

Montgomery will face this mathematics in North-West Europe in 1944 when British manpower reserves were pretty much tapped out and he could only rely on a small, set number of replacements per week with additional losses having to be made good by cannibalising existing units. He chose to accept greater overall casualties over a larger section of the front over a greater period of time in return for a lower per week rate of casualties among British troops. Patton, on the other hand, wanted an approach in which short, sharp bursts of activity resulted in very high rates of casualties for short periods of time but promised the ending of the war in a short period of time, necessitating only a few short pulses of activity which, overall, would have resulted in fewer Allied deaths before war's end. I always thought the majority of those who critiqued the Montgomery ( wide front ) vs Patton ( narrow thrust ) debate missed out this most crucial aspect of the debate. The Soviets would have liked Patton - once they got past all the past life shibboleths.


But....Montgomery is a reflection of his country. UK did not have the manpower to allow Montgomery to operate "Patton" style. If Monty had used the Patton style he probably would have been relieved..

_____________________________

---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2597400

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 110
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/14/2013 4:21:32 PM   
paullus99


Posts: 1595
Joined: 1/23/2002
Status: offline
Not to get off-topic, but better integration between British infantry & their armored units would have (plus more aggressive leadership at the Regimental level) produced better results with fewer overall casualties than the course they ultimately took.

So much of the Normandy planning was focused on just getting the men to & off the beaches, that very little time was taken to determine what was & wasn't possible once they got into the Hedgerows.....

_____________________________

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

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 111
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/14/2013 4:23:15 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
A reflection of his country? No, I disagree. He was an excellent commander who chose the right solution to fight the unalterable logistics he faced. If he'd faced different logistics I think he would have chosen differently.

He wasn't a limb-endangering Uxbridge of course in terms of daring but while I might detest the man I think he chose an appropriate strategy to fit the logistical limitations he found himself saddled with.


Paullus,
Aye there was a great deal that could have been done tactically but at the command level at which Montgomery operated it was difficult to effect such change. The regimental system was both a blessing and a curse with the advent of combined arms operations.



As an aside:
I'm considering taking up a late-war game as Allies or Japan. I'd like to play a modified version of the Armaggedon scenario I created some time ago. It isn't very historical at all but is designed to keep things "interesting" with the Japanese having made quite a few different decisions in order to keep things interested.

Personally, I've played this as Japan a few times and have my own thoughts on how to use the Japanese forces. I'd be interested to see what someone else came up with as Japan and would prefer to play as the Allies.

If you think AE is a simulation of what was then it won't suit you. If you think it is a sandbox in which units with the correct tactical-technical characteristics can do whatever physics allows then you'll have a blast. I should warn that Japan in this scenario is still a masochist's dream and that anyone taking them on should be aware that they'll need sneakiness to survive.

In addition to sneakiness an advanced grasp of logistics and the mechanics of production in AE is required as I've included quite a few less than obvious traps and snares in Japanese production.

I mention this here as I think the readers of this AAR would know what they're getting themselves into in terms of ethos and would be more likely to have an interest in the challenge of such a vast mismatch than the average person in the opponent's wanted section.

In terms of HR I'm always in favour of minimising them as much as possible but I have a policy of accepting almost all HRs suggested by opponents so long as they aren't trying to "win through rules lawyering". My view is that irrespective of the HRs someone imposes I'll just figure out a way to win through but that doesn't extend to the sorts of HRs which ban things people cannot defeat through good play. I think those sorts of HRs are crutches for poor play. You can, of course, disagree and that's why AE matches require matchmaking ;-)

< Message edited by Nemo121 -- 5/14/2013 4:36:38 PM >


_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 112
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/14/2013 4:32:08 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
P.s. Off-topic is welcome so long as the discussion is interesting and everyone keeps it non-personal. I have no stomach for people getting personal but I'm perfectly fine with any amount of meandering discussion.

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 113
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/14/2013 4:37:05 PM   
Canoerebel


Posts: 9768
Joined: 12/14/2002
From: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Status: offline
We can't get personal? But, Nemo, I find you scintillating, robust, and well-read. Is it okay if I get personal in mentioning such attributes?


(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 114
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/14/2013 4:46:24 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
Scintillate this you titillating southerner

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Canoerebel)
Post #: 115
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/14/2013 6:48:12 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
6th September, 1943

FINALLY!!! As you can see KB is about 150 miles north of Attu Island and enemy TFs have shown up about 350 miles south of Attu. They could be moving towards Attu or Amchitka or Adak at this stage but any of those is fine by me.

I have 3 Regiment equivalents of infantry at Dutch Harbour ready to air transport into whatever base they land at and strenuous USN repair efforts combined with a rather lax description of what constitutes a combat-ready ship have allowed the USN to gather a sizeable USN contingent at Dutch Harbour. 3 BBs ( 2 fast ( one of which only arrived at Dutch Harbour today after sprinting all the way from San Francisco ), 1 old and slow ), 4 CAs, 1 CL, 1 CLAA and about two-dozen destroyers are gathered within the harbour. orders are given for them to slip away from the docks. I form four combat TFs.

1. An SC TF centred around the modern CAs which makes its way to Adak. It will attempt to interdict the invasion forces while they are still at sea on the run-in to their targets.

2. A DD TF centred around the small number of fast, modern DDs I have available ( again the lack of logistical planning is hurting as many of the surviving ships have no radar as they missed their April 1942 upgrades ). This moves to Adak and is also intended for mid-ocean intercepts of the amphibious TFs.

3. A smaller TF centred on my two modern BBs, the CL and the CLAA. This is my most modern SC TF and has the majority of my radar-equipped ships. It is pathetically small with only 10 ships but I'm hoping that picking the commander with the highest naval skill in-game ( a naval skill of 91 ) should help them achieve outsize results. This TF remains behind to act as a second wave once the enemy are committed to a landing.

4. Lastly the old, slow BB and my oldest DDs are gathered into another TF. This old, slow, low endurance TF won't perform well in combat but I envision it as a third wave - a force designed to either intervene when the enemy are already suffering greatly from the blows of the previous TFs or as a force of desparation thrown into battle because the situation is desparate following the failure of the other TFs.


There's a 5th TF at sea also. This TF comprises 4 DDs moving down past Petropavlovsk with a view to intercepting either follow-on elements of the IJN invasion fleet or damaged elements of the fleet as they withdraw back to Japan. If things go badly I will simply throw it into cauldron around the landing sites.


In terms of airpower I have 90 fighters over Attu, 200 fighters over Adak Island and another 100 or so in reserve over Dutch Harbour. I have rebuilt the shattered DB and TB squadrons and can now deploy 30 torpedo bombers and just under 100 dive-bombers ( some of them biplanes but, as I said, losses were extreme ). I also have a solid core of B-17s and medium bombers ready to commit to the fray once the landings have occurred.

Damian had an HR to prevent 4-Engines bombing below 6,000 feet so, instead, I'll use them either as fighter attractors during any strike on the IJN fleet or to disrupt the ground troops he lands so as to help my defenders hold their ground.


In other news:
In China the redeployment of 1,500 AV to the new theatre is almost complete. They will join 1,000 AV already in-theatre and begin moving against their objectives. This should free things up a little. I doubt I'll capture much but I'll definitely pin IJA forces in the theatre - which is my goal.


In Oz sneakiness abounds and Allied forces continue to hold the enemy's attention around Katherine and Carnarvon while sneaky groups of dishonest men, pilots and sailors accomplish a completely unnoticed advance through the enemy's operational depth. They aren't in sufficient strength to turn it into a strategic victory because the logistics simply hadn't been developed to take advantage of the position I found but, given the position I found, one couldn't help but try. It won't last but it is certainly nice while it does




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 116
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/14/2013 7:45:53 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 2151
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
Looking forward to see how this plays out. Few players would risk their meagre assets in SCTFs with KB nearby. I admire your ability to see past the potential losses to the potential gains!


_____________________________

I have not yet begun to fight! OTOH I have not yet begun to flee. Hmmmmm - choices, choices -always with the choices.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 117
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/16/2013 3:56:25 AM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
7th September 1942..

Aleutians:
KB launched two strikes against surface forces at Adak. One strike got through CAP but the Kates went after DDs and the Vals all, thankfully, missed... at least partly due to the FlAK put up be the CL and CAs.

Over the course of the day 27 Vals, 9 Kates and 25 Zeroes were downed over Adak. That's pretty much an IJN CV's worth of planes removed from action. A dozen floatplanes were also downed.

So, at this stage KB has lost 1.5 CV's worth of planes around Adak in the past 4 days. Adak should become a Level 3 airfield tomorrow but, unfortunately, I still haven't managed to get radar into Adak which is really limiting the effectiveness of my CAP. Given its limitations it is doing quite well though. Quite a few new aces were created over Adak in the past few days.

The enemy amphibious TFs are creeping closer. I still can't tell if they are making for Adak or Attu or Amchitka but they don't seem to be going deep for Dutch Harbour.

I've decided to maintain my dispositions with:
1. the CA TF remaining at Adak.
2. The DD TF remaining at Adak.
3. the two BB TFs are to remain at Dutch Harbour.

One fast and one slow BB are just two days away from Dutch Harbour. Once they arrive I'd be happy to send my battleline in to face a half-dozen enemy BBs supporting the invasion so keeping my current BBs at Dutch Harbour acts to preserve this potentiality.

As you can see from the picture my definition of "combat-ready" has had to be stretched rather a lot due to the mauling the USN had received prior to my taking over so many of these ships have significant combat damage already. That's ok though since their job isn't necessarily to win the battle. Their job is to draw KB's attention, allowing my CAP to destroy its planes, and to disrupt enemy landings. So long as enough of the SC TF elements survive combat with the IJN covering elements to get in amongst the transports and threaten them ( forcing them to break off their landings ) these forces will have done their job.

If I can force the Japanese to draw out the actual unloading of troops over 3 or 4 days I'll get the opportunity to whittle away at KB until such time as my bombers actually begin getting through and getting hits AND I'll get the opportunity to airbridge in troops from Dutch - where a division or so of troops in reserve is just waiting to see which island the Japanese hit.

In an attempt to get mid-ocean intercepts I've given the SC TFs at Adak the ability to react up to 6 hexes away. With a little luck this might result in a couple of mid-ocean intercepts of amphibious TFs - possibly even KB although, frankly, I'd prefer to intercept the amphibious shipping.

Oh, I forgot to mention I dislike the way Damian is moving KB around freely away from the amphibious TFs. I want to tether him more closely to them as this will give my forces greater freedom of movement. Therefore I've order the B-17 squadron at Attu and a squadron of SB2Us to attack any shipping within 5 hexes of Attu. If the enemy amphibious ships make for Attu and Damian doesn't provide close cover from KB there's a good chance the SB2Us could do some damage tomorrow. Even if they don't the mere threat will alter his behaviour and give the USN more searoom.


Oz:
Formidable still won't bloody sink. She has robbed me of 200 points already and will rob another 65 a day until she sinks. For some reason I can't scuttle the bloody thing either. Stupid, deterministic design decision.

India:
Still waiting for the RN to finish its SLOW cruise up from Oz. Nothing much I can do till then.

China:
Last but not least China remains quiet and it looks like the strategic move of Chinese troops has gone unnoticed. Unless Damian is truly paranoid I expect to catch his garrisons by surprise and have a little fun.







Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Nemo121 -- 5/16/2013 3:59:11 AM >


_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 118
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/16/2013 8:40:51 AM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 2151
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
Annoying problem with Formidable. I'd run her at Full Speed for as long as her fuel lasts to try to cause runaway flooding. If that fails, it will accumulate damage fairly quickly once it is out of fuel. Running it toward a nest of Japanese subs or netties could also be useful.

_____________________________

I have not yet begun to fight! OTOH I have not yet begun to flee. Hmmmmm - choices, choices -always with the choices.

(in reply to Nemo121)
Post #: 119
RE: No fleet, no problem... - 5/16/2013 1:31:05 PM   
Nemo121


Posts: 5807
Joined: 2/6/2004
Status: offline
BBfanboy,

Yeah I've been running her at full speed up the coast of Oz for 4 days now. Flooding increased to 81 but stubbornly stayed put. Today,  thankfully, an IJN submarine spotted her and put a torpedo into her. Scratch one waste of 65 PP per day


In other news on the 8th September 1942:


Oz:
The Allies take Katherine destroying 70 combat squads, almost 100 support squads and proportional quantities of engineers and vehicles. The 33rd division retreated out of Katherine but it must have almost no squads left. The only question in my mind is whether or not the Japanese retreat immediately to Darwin or try to hold at the river line south of it. My hope is that they'll try to hold so that my sneaky efforts elsewhere have more time to gather pace and gain a foothold.

At Carnarvon an enemy FT TF moves in and picks up most of the rest of the IJA division trapped there. I'm happy to let it go since I had less than 100 AV in the hex spread between 2 Bdes of infantry and a Bn of tanks. Hell, I was worried they'd take Carnarvon back from me.


Burma:
Slow moves through the jungle continue apace as do some small FT TFs aimed at bringing supplies into Ramree in order to get the airfield there built up. 3 Chinese Corps at the border between Burma and China seem to be worrying Damian also as he has a large force - which looks divisional in size to me - facing them. These Corps are assigned to Chinese armies and I don't have the PP to buy them out so they'll have to remain in China ( we are paying PP to cross national boundaries since I gave Damian the choice of whether he wanted to play with or without that restriction. )


Aleutians:
Lots of combat today....

Overnight an IJN SC TF made up of 2 fast BBs, 4 CAs and about a half-dozen DDs attempted to assault Adak Island. They initially met the 4-CA SC TF and in rough fighting 1 USN CA went down while an IJN CA was badly damaged. Later the same IJN TF met with the DD TF at Adak and sank 2 of my DDs in return for some moderate damage to a couple of IJN DDs. The lack of upgrades and radar on these ships is now being felt. Two PT boat TFs got into action as well although they scored no torpedo hits and suffered some losses.

The USN TFs succeeded in their task though in that the airfield was not bombarded. At daybreak the IJN SC TF had been broken up with clashes with two elements showing that at least 3 CAs had split from the force. 1 was a heavily damaged CA being escorted away by DDs while the other was a strange TF of 2 CAs, one of which was on fire but appeared only lightly damaged and the other of which seemed undamaged.

KB once again attempted to sweep my fighters from the sky over Adak and sent in over 90 fighters. I don't have the orders turn yet but the combat replay showed the IJN Zeroes suffering large losses again with approximately 25 of their number being downed.


The IJN amphibious TF seems to be moving north very slowly and ended the turn just outside of the range of the dive-bombers I'd stationed at Attu Island.


Overall the day has gone well for me:
1. 25 or so IJNAF fighters downed in return for maybe 10 of my own.

2. 2 IJN CAs appear sufficiently damaged to warrant withdrawal.

3. IJN CAs and BBs fired off a large quantity of main gun rounds and will have difficulty replenishing. This will make them exceedingly vulnerable in future rounds of combat.

4. The IJN DDs have fired off many torpedoes during the two rounds of combat with the CA-led TF and the DD TF. This will reduce, although not eliminate, the torpedo threat to the USN BBs.



So, for tomorrow what are my plans:
1. Switch all air transport efforts to Adak and fly an additional regiment of troops in there.

2. Send the TFs at Adak back to Dutch Harbour for resupply, replenishment and repair.

3. Bring the fast BB and slow BB TFs up from Dutch Harbour to Adak.

4. Begin organising escorts etc from the CA and DD TF being sent to Dutch Harbour to form a combat TF with the 2 BBs due in Dutch Harbour in two days time. When the fast BB and slow BB TFs sent to Adak get chewed up - either defending Adak from bombardment tonight or Attu Island from the amphibious TFs in a day's time )- the 2 BBs at Dutch Harbour will be available to move to Adak and enter action there. And when those 2 BBs are exhausted in action I'll roll back to the CAs and BBs which previously held the line. He won't be able to force a successful invasion in the face of that sort of resistance.


5. In Oz I'll focus on bringing supplies into Katherine and from there try to interdict the shipping into Darwin as he tries to evacuate.... in addition to getting away with as much sneakiness as I can manage.


6. Burma -  The race to pin him as far north, east and west as possible before he realizes the need to retreat southward remains on. The RN continues its crawl into relevance and until it is present there's precious little I can do around Ramree. There's potential here for seriously hurting IJN surface assets if he sends them in vs Adak island again and if the RN BBs can tangle with his BBs and CAs raiding into the Bay of Bengal.


So, all in all a good day. I've lost one DD to IJN airpower during its current foray into the Aleutians and fought the IJN surface element to a draw with inferior, damaged USN ships ( but I did spend a lot of PPs on getting the best TF commanders ).

_____________________________

John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: No fleet, no problem... Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.117