Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - No MM yet

 
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 >> Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - No MM yet Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - No MM... - 4/28/2014 1:28:38 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 3982
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
I don't know/think this will turn into an AAR of the full game, however I wanted to write this up with my documentation in order to show forumites what I did (right, wrong, etc.).

Operation Looking For Poop
The name of this operation is a bit of an in-joke. Basically, I went "looking for poop" in northern Honshu/Hokkaido with nearly the entire (seaworthy) USN in April 1942.

The impulse for the operation was born way back around turn 85 or so (3/1/1942), when Saratoga and Yorktown sailed north from Pearl Harbor to try to sink any IJN presence in the Aleutians. Results there were lackluster, so they put in at Prince Rupert. I began mulling the idea of an industry strike at Sapporo and the Sakhalins. This is Scenario 1, so Sapporo doesn't have any aircraft or engine factories (IIRC), however I wanted to mess with MM's mind. Eventually it became a grab for VPs if possible. I rarely plan things out to this degree, I usually play "by feel" more often than not, however I knew I was risking all 4 of my USN CVs in the first half of 1942 and needed to put the basics of a plan together. The final approach was not planned out, as I couldn't be certain where any holes in his naval search patterns might be, if there were any.

Eventually the plan morphed into "Go Big or Go Home", with the entire OOB comprising 4 CVs, 1 BB, 7 CAs, 2 good CLs, 2 1920s CLs, and dozens of modern DDs, plus 8 AOs with their escorts (and the accidental inclusion of an AE) and a diversionary force of 1 AM and 2 xAKs.

Objectives
1. Force MM to bring units back to the home islands if possible by conducting a psychological raid on Hokkaido and northeastern Honshu. Targets: Sapporo (by air), Utsonomiya or Hamamatsu if possible (by sea), targets of opportunity along the coast (by sea).
2. Gain some badly-needed VPs as well as sting MM's economy in the home islands by bombing industry.

Order of Battle

Task Force 147
CV Hornet, CV Yorktown
CA New Orleans, CA Minneapolis, CA Vincennes
DD Craven, DD McCall, DD Maury, DD Ellet, DD Downes

Task Force 406
CV Saratoga, CV Enterprise
CA Astoria, CA Cornwall, CL Glasgow
DD Ralph Talbot, DD Henley, DD Jarvis, DD Benham, DD Dunlap, DD Balch

Task Force 173 - SCTF/Bombardment
BB Colorado
CL Trenton, CL Concord
DD Mahan, DD Smith, DD Reid

Task Force 284 - SCTF/Bombardment, CV Screen
CA San Francisco, CA Indianapolis
CL Honolulu
DD Porter, DD Selfridge, DD Flusser, DD Tucker, DD Meredith

Task Force 161 - CV Screen/Pickets
DD Sims, DD Hammann, DD Mustin, DD Russell

Second screening/picket TF
DD Drayton, DD Case, DD Conyngham, DD Shaw, DD Cassin

Other escorts
DD Gwin, DD Grayson, DD Hughes, DD Anderson, DD O'Brien
DD Walke, DD Gridley, DD Phelps, DD Fanning

< Message edited by Lokasenna -- 4/28/2014 3:10:07 AM >
Post #: 1
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/28/2014 1:40:18 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 3982
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
Prelude and Approach

As I ramped up to for the operation, I had reinforcement convoys (including Enterprise & escorts, plus several more cruisers) returning from the South Pacific and Australia. We are playing with variable reinforcements for the Allies, +/- 60 days, and I got the Hornet early. She docked at Pearl Harbor on March 16, to await Enterprise's return on March 30.

I begin stationing submarines off the Kuriles around this time, in single hex patrol zones, hoping that they will become detected and I can sniff out Naval Search patterns. None are ever detected, up through the conclusion of the operation, aside from 2 or 3 attacks on Japanese xAKs in the area.

Kido Butai raids Luganville on March 15, and on March 31 Kates/Vals are sighted near Noumea and Norfolk Island. They sink a handful of very valuable APs and AKs that are reinforcing Noumea, as well as damaging Boise and Leander.

On March 25, Saratoga and Yorktown set sail from Prince Rupert to hold position at the rendezvous south of Adak Island. Enterprise and Hornet joined them there on April 5.

On April 2, MKB engages with the 2 Brit CVs and CVL near Exmouth. It is a tactical IJN victory, though no RN ships are sunk. Formidable and Indomitable must repair, almost for their entire remaining time that they are available to me. MKB had previously been sighted in the Straits of Malacca, but this solidifies my intelligence that all or nearly all IJN flight decks are in the southern hemisphere.

On April 4, KB strikes Townsville's port. CL Adelaide, CL Achilles, and CL Marblehead are all sunk, as is DD Le Triomphant and SS Tambor. Painful, but KB's presence in this area is welcome considering my movements up north.


On April 7, the entire fleet was ready to go. The approach was south of the Aleutians, with the CVs northernmost among the TFs and a few hexes behind. Once within 800 miles of the Kuriles, numerous escorts were broken off from the CV TFs to form screening TFs and "air search locators", along with 2 SC TFs (the cores: San Francisco/Indianapolis/Honolulu and Colorado/Trenton/Concord) that would proceed towards Tokyo, with the goal of being sighted and diverting as much air power as possible from the Hokkaido/Kuriles area.

On April 9, I changed the plan slightly. I decided that I would send an AM and 2 xAKs as a diversionary force, changing the primary mission of my cruisers and battleship to bombardment and secondary to diversion. AM Vireo and 2 14-knot xAKs set sail from Kodiak. By April 20, they were in position to begin being detected. I knew that MM had read Bullwinkle's thread and figured that if he saw xAKs, he'd anticipate a landing and I could take advantage of his reaction. I assumed that if he saw xAKs as well as surface forces within 1 or 2 days' sail from Utsonomiya, he would think I had brought even more than Bullwinkle did in an attempt to flip the hex and destroy the industry.

First screenshot taken of approach.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lokasenna -- 4/28/2014 2:51:49 AM >

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 2
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/28/2014 1:47:22 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 3982
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
Approach - April 18, 1942

Assuming, from information that I received from Bullwinkle, that I need to be within SBD extended range at least in order to set city target to Sapporo, I begin putting together my final approach plan.

The 7 DDs scouting force, exactly the same size as the CV TFs, proceeds 5 hexes ahead of the CVs in hopes of being sighted. In the event of a high level of detection and not being able to pull off the strike immediately following such detection, I intended to pull the plug on the operation.

Broken-off CV escorts are intended to provide surface cover and air strike confusion in the event of the IJN's appearance.

Screen shot shows path of approach.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 3
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/28/2014 1:55:37 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 3982
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
Approach and first sighting - April 19

One of my DD screening forces is sighted due east of Chiba/Yokosuka. The diversionary forces to the southwest still have not been sighted. This is not what I intended, however with only a 2/2 DL the operation is still on.

I learn later that MM assumed with this sighting that I was coming to flip a coastal hex for industrial VPs.

On April 18, one of my newly-created TFs becomes TF 1. This means KB has been disbanded and not reformed (else he would have TF 1). I suspect they are repairing operational damage and replacing what few planes they have lost. I estimate that KB put in at Truk, roughly 2 weeks' sail from Townsville.

On April 19, heavy radio transmissions detected at Truk. My estimate appears to have been correct, as I assume this is KB reforming to sail north in case he can catch me.





Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 4
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/28/2014 1:58:51 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 3982
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
Approach - still undetected, April 20

The DDs that were sighted yesterday are now DL 7/7. However, the diversionary forces are all within 6 or 7 hexes of Utsonomiya and not sighted. Due to the 7/7 DL on the 4 DDs and that my southern forces are not sighted, I decide not to push my luck going for Hamamatsu. The SC TFs are going in to Utsonomiya this day. That alone should divert his attention, if anything.

A small 3-ship IJN TF is sighted, but DL is only 1/1 - presumably due to the submarine in the hex.

Due to one of those strange turns of fate in war, the skies are clear in the one hex that my northern TFs are occupying. All 3 are sighted, and sighted well. I decide that it's Go Big Or Go Home, and in they go.

For the record, the forecast for the entire area of operations was thunderstorms. I was hoping the weather would hold.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lokasenna -- 4/28/2014 3:03:10 AM >

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 5
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/28/2014 2:01:51 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 3982
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
I realize now that some of my screenshots are mislabeled. I was doing them after the fact, and my OOB at top may be slightly inaccurate due to the operation's conclusion and the disbanding of several TFs in port, as well as the reorganizing of damaged ships on the withdrawal from the target area.

City attack setup - April 21

On this day when I reach H-Hex + 1 (7 hexes out, target hex changed due to sighting on April 20) with my CVs, I learn that I actually could have set my city attack target one day prior and launched a complete surprise attack.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 6
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/28/2014 2:07:56 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 3982
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
First engagements and bombardment - April 20

Colorado & Co. meet the "3 TK" IJN TF on the way into Utsonomiya. Just enough OPs are burned that they do not make it to the bombardment zone, and are caught a few hexes from the shores of Honshu during the day.

quote:

Night Time Surface Combat, near Iwaki at 117,62, Range 2,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
xAK Unyo Maru, Shell hits 10, heavy fires
xAK Tensin Maru, Shell hits 13, and is sunk
xAK Tempei Maru, Shell hits 3, and is sunk

Allied Ships
BB Colorado
CL Trenton
CL Concord
DD Mahan
DD Smith
DD Reid

Reduced visibility due to Thunderstorms with 25% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Thunderstorms and 25% moonlight: 2,000 yards


I also gain some intelligence this day:
quote:

Night Time Surface Combat, near Sendai at 117,58, Range 2,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
PB Fumi Maru, Shell hits 7, and is sunk
xAK Muroran Maru, Shell hits 17, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAK Uga Maru, Shell hits 3, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
xAK Gyoko Maru, Shell hits 24, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAK Syunko Maru, Shell hits 12, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk

Allied Ships
DD Sims
DD Hammann
DD Mustin
DD Russell

Allied Ships Reported to be Approaching!
Japanese TF suspends unloading operations and begins to get underway
Poor visibility due to Thunderstorms with 25% moonlight


It looks like a resource convoy unloading here. Good to know. I think Sendai is too exposed to be used for this purpose, but am glad that he is using it.

Then, the secondary bombardment hits:
quote:

Night Naval bombardment of Sendai at 117,58

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Japanese aircraft losses
A5M4 Claude: 13 damaged

Allied Ships
DD Russell
DD Mustin
DD Hammann
DD Sims

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

Airbase hits 4
Airbase supply hits 4
Runway hits 8

Sadly, no industry hits, but it was just DDs bombarding.


The main event at Utsonomiya:
quote:

Night Naval bombardment of Utsonomiya at 115,60

Allied Ships
CA San Francisco
CA Indianapolis
CL Honolulu
DD Selfridge
DD Porter
DD Tucker
DD Flusser

Japanese ground losses:
260 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 25 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled

Ki-93-Ia factory hits 1
Nakajima Ha-5 hits 2

Resources hits 1
Manpower hits 1
Fires 280

Airbase hits 7
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 19
Port hits 6
Port fuel hits 1
Port supply hits 1

SOC-1 Seagull acting as spotter for CA San Francisco
CA San Francisco firing at Utsonomiya
CA Indianapolis firing at Utsonomiya
CL Honolulu firing at 61st Infantry Group
DD Selfridge firing at Utsonomiya
DD Porter firing at Utsonomiya
DD Tucker firing at Utsonomiya
DD Flusser firing at Utsonomiya


During the day, the CV escorts catch a DD:
quote:

Day Time Surface Combat, near Kushiro at 125,60, Range 4,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
DD Kisaragi, Shell hits 8, and is sunk

Allied Ships
CA Minneapolis
CL Glasgow
DD Benham
DD Ellet
DD Dunlap
DD Fanning
DD Downes
DD Phelps
DD Balch

Low visibility due to Thunderstorms
Maximum visibility in Thunderstorms: 6,000 yards


< Message edited by Lokasenna -- 4/28/2014 3:11:26 AM >

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 7
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/28/2014 2:14:34 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 3982
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
April 20 air phase - The Trainees Strike Back

quote:


Morning Air attack on TF, near Iwaki at 116,61

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid detected at 31 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 13 minutes

Japanese aircraft
B5N1 Kate x 31

No Japanese losses

Allied Ships
CL Trenton, Bomb hits 3, on fire
BB Colorado, Bomb hits 4
CL Concord

Aircraft Attacking:
31 x B5N1 Kate bombing from 5000 feet
Naval Attack: 2 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Iwaki at 116,61

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid detected at 19 NM, estimated altitude 18,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 6 minutes

Japanese aircraft
B5N1 Kate x 3
D3A1 Val x 26

Japanese aircraft losses
D3A1 Val: 1 damaged

Allied Ships
CL Concord, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires
BB Colorado, Bomb hits 14, heavy fires
CL Trenton, on fire
DD Mahan

Aircraft Attacking:
12 x D3A1 Val releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg GP Bomb
1 x D3A1 Val releasing from 2000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
3 x B5N1 Kate bombing from 5000 feet
Naval Attack: 2 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
1 x D3A1 Val releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg GP Bomb
4 x D3A1 Val releasing from 1000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
8 x D3A1 Val releasing from 3000'
Naval Attack: 1 x 250 kg GP Bomb

Heavy smoke from fires obscuring BB Colorado
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Iwaki at 116,61

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid detected at 18 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 7 minutes

Japanese aircraft
B5N1 Kate x 31

No Japanese losses

Allied Ships
BB Colorado, Bomb hits 5, on fire
DD Reid
CL Concord, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
CL Trenton, on fire

Aircraft Attacking:
31 x B5N1 Kate bombing from 5000 feet
Naval Attack: 2 x 250 kg SAP Bomb

Heavy smoke from fires obscuring BB Colorado


At least this also occurred during the day. If he was paying attention, he should have seen that I had all 4 CVs present, however in his email with the turn he mentioned that he was impressed that I was risking "2 USN CVs off the coast of Japan" .

quote:


Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Kushiro at 123,58

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid detected at 70 NM, estimated altitude 17,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 26 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 17
D3A1 Val x 14

Allied aircraft
F4F-3A Wildcat x 13
F4F-3 Wildcat x 77

Japanese aircraft losses
A5M4 Claude: 5 destroyed
D3A1 Val: 9 destroyed

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 8
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/28/2014 2:22:20 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 3982
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
Skirmishes and repositioning - April 21

Unfortunately, I suffer from a sync bug this day so my movie doesn't quite match what actually happened.

More night engagements off the coast between fragments of the IJN DD force and my screening SCTFs. Everyone seems to get in on the action.

I decided to send my bombardment TF in on Kushiro, as it has over 600 Resources and damaging those should count for strategic loss VPs.


quote:

Night Time Surface Combat, near Kushiro at 126,59, Range 2,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
DD Mutsuki
DD Uzuki

Allied Ships
DD Sims
DD Hammann
DD Mustin, Shell hits 2, on fire
DD Russell, Shell hits 1, on fire

Poor visibility due to Thunderstorms with 32% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Thunderstorms and 32% moonlight: 2,000 yards
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Kushiro at 126,58, Range 2,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
DD Yayoi

Allied Ships
DD Sims
DD Hammann
DD Mustin, on fire
DD Russell, Shell hits 3, heavy fires

Poor visibility due to Thunderstorms with 32% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Thunderstorms and 32% moonlight: 2,000 yards
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Etorofu at 129,59, Range 2,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
DD Minekaze, Shell hits 1
DD Sawakaze
DD Yukaze, Shell hits 1

Allied Ships
DD Case, Shell hits 1
DD Conyngham
DD Cassin, Shell hits 1

Reduced visibility due to Thunderstorms with 32% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Thunderstorms and 32% moonlight: 2,000 yards
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Kushiro at 125,58, Range 1,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
DD Yayoi, Shell hits 1

Allied Ships
CA Indianapolis
CA San Francisco
CL Honolulu
DD Flusser
DD Tucker
DD Porter
DD Selfridge

Poor visibility due to Thunderstorms with 32% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Thunderstorms and 32% moonlight: 2,000 yards
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Kushiro at 124,58, Range 2,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
DD Yayoi, Shell hits 5, heavy fires, heavy damage

Allied Ships
CA Minneapolis, Shell hits 1
CL Glasgow
DD Benham
DD Ellet
DD Dunlap
DD Fanning
DD Downes
DD Phelps
DD Balch

Low visibility due to Thunderstorms with 32% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Thunderstorms and 32% moonlight: 2,000 yards


And the bombardment:
quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Naval bombardment of Kushiro at 123,53

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Japanese aircraft losses
A5M4 Claude: 16 damaged
A5M4 Claude: 2 destroyed on ground
Ki-27b Nate: 7 damaged

Japanese Ships
xAK Koki Maru, Shell hits 1

Allied Ships
CA San Francisco
CA Indianapolis
CL Honolulu
DD Selfridge
DD Porter
DD Tucker
DD Flusser

Japanese ground losses:
74 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled

Resources hits 1
Light Industry hits 1
Manpower hits 2
Fires 251

Airbase hits 3
Airbase supply hits 5
Runway hits 21
Port hits 5
Port fuel hits 4
Port supply hits 2

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 9
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/28/2014 2:34:32 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 3982
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
The Main Event - Poop Found! - April 21

MM loses 134 planes this day, almost all of them in air to air over the USN CVs. It's amazing! Only 7 Allied aircraft are lost this day, all of them in Australia. 51 Kates and 22 Claudes are shot down off Honshu, with more losses to flak and ops. By May 1, USN and USMC pilots on the CVs have claimed 145 kills - the Lannister's share of them in this battle.

quote:

Morning Air attack on TF, near Kushiro at 122,55

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid detected at 64 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 27 minutes

Japanese aircraft
B5N1 Kate x 12
Ki-27b Nate x 27

Allied aircraft
F4F-3A Wildcat x 10
F4F-3 Wildcat x 71

Japanese aircraft losses
B5N1 Kate: 8 destroyed
Ki-27b Nate: 12 destroyed


No Allied losses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Kushiro at 122,55

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid detected at 56 NM, estimated altitude 6,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 19 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 8
G4M1 Betty x 18

Allied aircraft
F4F-3A Wildcat x 8
F4F-3 Wildcat x 66

Japanese aircraft losses
A5M4 Claude: 1 destroyed
G4M1 Betty: 8 destroyed, 3 damaged

G4M1 Betty: 1 destroyed by flak

No Allied losses

Allied Ships
CV Yorktown

Aircraft Attacking:
6 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Naval Attack: 1 x 18in Type 91 Torpedo

Yorktown has a scare here. Due to the sync bug, I did not see this - these planes instead went after Colorado, sinking her in my movie, as well as CL Concord.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Kushiro at 122,55

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid detected at 52 NM, estimated altitude 9,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 21 minutes

Japanese aircraft
B5N2 Kate x 48

Allied aircraft
F4F-3A Wildcat x 6
F4F-3 Wildcat x 59

Japanese aircraft losses
B5N2 Kate: 28 destroyed

No Allied losses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Kushiro at 122,55

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid detected at 80 NM, estimated altitude 9,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 34 minutes

Japanese aircraft
B5N1 Kate x 6

Allied aircraft
F4F-3A Wildcat x 6
F4F-3 Wildcat x 39

Japanese aircraft losses
B5N1 Kate: 4 destroyed

No Allied losses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Kushiro at 122,55

Weather in hex: Thunderstorms

Raid detected at 80 NM, estimated altitude 9,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 34 minutes

Japanese aircraft
B5N1 Kate x 6

Allied aircraft
F4F-3A Wildcat x 6
F4F-3 Wildcat x 39

Japanese aircraft losses
B5N1 Kate: 4 destroyed

No Allied losses


Here is my air attack. It is very effective. MM is not pleased. I gained 124 strategic loss VPs for this strike, and started tens of thousands of fires. Before they are all put out, my strategic VPs will be at 304 - probably 280 VPs from this strike alone. I am unsure how many, if any, points of industry were destroyed rather than damaged. I think some may have been destroyed as there are only 166 total points of industry at Sapporo, plus 9 Manpower. At 2 VPs per damaged industry and 20 per destroyed, I figure I may have destroyed 2-5 points' worth. I hope it was the Oil!

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Sapporo , at 120,51

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid spotted at 20 NM, estimated altitude 12,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 7 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 20

Allied aircraft
F4F-3A Wildcat x 14
F4F-3 Wildcat x 10
SBD-2 Dauntless x 36
SBD-3 Dauntless x 105
TBD-1 Devastator x 60

Japanese aircraft losses
A5M4 Claude: 4 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
SBD-3 Dauntless: 5 damaged

Manpower hits 126
Oil hits 1
Fires 53985


The Oil is reported as 2 (4) in the next day's turn. MM comments in the email that my CV strike did better than Jocke's B-29s! My entire strike wing flew with perfect coordination.


More empty retaliatory strikes:
quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Etorofu at 130,58

Weather in hex: Light cloud

Raid detected at 3 NM, estimated altitude 7,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 0 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 13
G4M1 Betty x 8

No Japanese losses

Allied Ships
CA Indianapolis
CA San Francisco

Aircraft Attacking:
8 x G4M1 Betty bombing from 5000 feet
Naval Attack: 2 x 250 kg SAP Bomb, 4 x 60 kg GP Bomb



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Kushiro at 122,55

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid detected at 79 NM, estimated altitude 6,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 33 minutes

Japanese aircraft
B5N1 Kate x 3
Ki-27b Nate x 20

Allied aircraft
F4F-3A Wildcat x 9
F4F-3 Wildcat x 71

Japanese aircraft losses
B5N1 Kate: 1 destroyed
Ki-27b Nate: 3 destroyed


No Allied losses

Allied Ships
CV Yorktown

Aircraft Attacking:
2 x B5N1 Kate bombing from 5000 feet *
Naval Attack: 2 x 250 kg SAP Bomb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Kushiro at 122,55

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid detected at 40 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 17 minutes

Japanese aircraft
B5N2 Kate x 7

Allied aircraft
F4F-3A Wildcat x 8
F4F-3 Wildcat x 63

Japanese aircraft losses
B5N2 Kate: 5 destroyed

No Allied losses

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 10
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/28/2014 2:44:52 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 3982
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
The Morning After - April 22

MM comments in email that he thinks the raid is a draw. I assume he is referring only to this day's strikes. He thinks I have lost a BB and CL plus 2 DDs, though at this point I have only lost CL Concord and 2 DDs. Trenton is heavily damaged and scuttled during the night, however.

quote:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Ominato at 122,60

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid spotted at 3 NM, estimated altitude 7,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 1 minutes

Japanese aircraft
B5N1 Kate x 31
Ki-27b Nate x 13

No Japanese losses

Allied Ships
BB Colorado, Bomb hits 13, on fire, heavy damage
CL Trenton, Bomb hits 5, heavy fires, heavy damage
DD Reid


All damage to Colorado is minor, though the numbers aren't great - 39 System, 10 Float, 16 Engine, and still 5 Fires.

Pre-turn screenshot is mostly self-explanatory.



The diversionary force is not pictured, but it is now playing the undesirable role of KB Early Warning Force, positioned to the SE on the direct vector between Truk and my TFs.

The day's air strikes below. I lose a handful of TBDs, but that's basically it. The goal of these strikes was to get some cheap VPs and force him to recreate his Hokkaido-based CS Convoys. I may have been able to strike his industry again, but I wanted to broaden the impact of the raid rather than deepen it.

Bolded ships sunk or assumed sunk. Underlined ships possibly sunk.

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Ominato at 119,54

Weather in hex: Heavy cloud

Raid spotted at 15 NM, estimated altitude 12,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 5 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 4

Allied aircraft
F4F-3A Wildcat x 13
F4F-3 Wildcat x 10
SBD-2 Dauntless x 32
SBD-3 Dauntless x 34

Japanese aircraft losses
A5M4 Claude: 2 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
SBD-3 Dauntless: 7 damaged

Japanese Ships
xAK Ayo Maru, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage
CM Hoko, Bomb hits 3, and is sunk
CMc Ento, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk
xAKL Shinmei Maru, Bomb hits 3, and is sunk
xAK Horai Maru, Bomb hits 3, and is sunk
CM Nasami, Bomb hits 3, and is sunk
xAKL Takegawa Maru, Bomb hits 4, and is sunk

xAK Bisan Maru
CM Sokuten, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk
xAK Banshu Maru, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage


The CM-class ships convert to decent coastal E-class vessels. I am glad these are sunk.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Hakodate at 119,53

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid detected at 37 NM, estimated altitude 15,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 14 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 9
Ki-27b Nate x 29

Allied aircraft
SBD-3 Dauntless x 47
TBD-1 Devastator x 44

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
SBD-3 Dauntless: 1 destroyed, 25 damaged
TBD-1 Devastator: 3 destroyed, 11 damaged

Japanese Ships
xAK Nitiho Maru, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAK Nasusan Maru, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage

xAK Sumiyoshi Maru, Bomb hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
xAK Tokusima Maru, Bomb hits 4, and is sunk
xAK Kyuma Maru, Bomb hits 1, on fire
xAK Tempei Maru
xAK Nitiyo Maru, Bomb hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAK Samarang Maru, Bomb hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage

PB Santo Maru
xAK La Plata Maru, Bomb hits 1, on fire
xAK Morioka Maru
xAK Nichiren Maru, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Hirosaki/Aomori at 118,54

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid spotted at 15 NM, estimated altitude 15,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 5 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 3

Allied aircraft
SBD-3 Dauntless x 17
TBD-1 Devastator x 15

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
TBD-1 Devastator: 2 damaged

Japanese Ships
xAK Ikushima Maru, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAK Hankow Maru
xAK Kasuga Maru #2, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAK Senko Maru, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk

xAK Taito Maru
xAK Manko Maru
xAK Heito Maru, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires
xAK Hino Maru #3
xAK Tarushima Maru, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires


Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lokasenna -- 4/28/2014 3:45:16 AM >

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 11
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/28/2014 2:47:00 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 3982
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
Withdrawal - April 23 through May 1

The raid complete, I order everyone to high-tail it out of the combat zone. I suffer a couple of DL pings during the subsequent days, mostly on my AOs (which was frustrating), however by April 27 nearly all forces are relatively in the clear.




I choose to route between the Kuriles and Aleutians, anticipating a hole in his search patterns here as well as the Bering Sea being that much further from KB is they came north in response.

Unfortunately, on April 30 the RO-66 catches CV Enterprise with a torpedo while she is holding station near her position in this screenshot, ready to respond to any non-KB IJN presence coming after my escort TFs. Damage is minor at 11/16 (12)/5, but she'll have to head to Puget Sound for repairs once the rest of the TF stops at Prince Rupert.

On April 25, still retreating from Honshu, Colorado is struck some more. Damage remains all minor, but is now 58 System, 17 Float, 31 Engine, and 8 Fires. By May 1, damage has shifted to 60/14/34/0. Speed is finally changed to Cruise, and she makes for Prince Rupert with the rest of the escorts.

On April 30, San Francisco makes Dutch Harbor with Indianapolis and Honolulu. They disband and begin repairs, with all damage able to be handled by the size 5 (soon to be 6) port and its 300 Naval Support.

On May 1, repairs begin on 3 DDs that made Prince Rupert. Yorktown and Hornet are only a few days out as well.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lokasenna -- 4/28/2014 3:52:00 AM >

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 12
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/28/2014 3:12:21 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 3982
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
USN Losses

10 TBD's
5 SBD's
2 F4F-3A's

Sunk
CL Trenton (scuttled)
CL Concord
DD Drayton
DD Shaw

Damaged
CV Enterprise - slight. 11 / 16(12) / 5
BB Colorado - heavily, though will not need Shipyard space except for some devices
DD Fanning - collision, moderate, 1 / 36(36) / 38(24)
DD Phelps - collision, slight, 3 / 19(16) / 5(4)
DD Russell - moderate to heavy System, 48 / 9(5) / 12(1)
DD Case - slight to moderate, 19 / 7(7) / 1(1)
DD Mustin - slight, 14 / 7(7) / 7

IJN Losses

~140 aircraft

Sunk/Presumed Sunk (VP value)
DD Kisaragi (6)
DD Yayoi (6?)
19 xAK (110-122 or more)
2 xAKL (6)
3 CM (3)
1 CMc (1)
1 PB (1)

Evaluation
At the start of this operation's action phase, VPs sat at a dismal 21331 : 7588, or a 2.811 : 1 ratio. As of May 1, VPs are now at 22341 : 8674, or a 2.576 : 1 ratio. This is a marked improvement, though by no means is my gain limited to this operation. Estimated gains from this operation are only 304 Strategic VPs, 134 - 140 air loss VPs, and perhaps 130 - 150 or more naval VPs; or between 568 - 600ish VPs. Losses were 65 naval and 17 air loss. Therefore this operation achieved a 7:1 VP ratio, as well as the psychological effect of a highly effective raid on Sapporo. Politically speaking (and "in-universe"), Pearl Harbor has been partially avenged. In terms of VPs, it has been avenged and then some.

Lessons
1. I can plan an op!

2. The Japanese player needs to protect his home islands as early as March 1942. At minimum, this means lots of naval search to prevent approach, however even that might not be enough. I don't know what MM's search zones were like, but he mentioned transferring Jakes to Hokkaido and the Kuriles. I assume he had at least one Mavis unit available, and I sighted Nells on search after the initial detection as well.

However, it also means the availability of air units beyond just the trainees. This can be as little as having a reserve of good pilots to transfer in to Zeroes on training in General Defense HQ. Claudes and Nates won't cut it - send the Nates to Manchukuo/China, and retire the Claudes.

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 13
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/28/2014 11:10:05 AM   
Lowpe

 

Posts: 5903
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: online
Nice raid, especially so given the IJN has some of the western Aluetians.

For the Japanese, there is no reason why that first Kate strike didn't have torpedoes. There are several Air HQ restricted to the HI, and they should become bases in the north with torpedoes, hundreds of torpedoes and some of those northern airfields need to be expanded from day one.

The AA units not bought out need to be repositioned to help protect from this kind of raid, units repositioned and at least level one forts built up to protect from a base attack/raid. Probably can't afford to put minefields there to hurt shore bombardments, but if you don't use mini-subs much this might be a place for them. Put em there and forget about them.

Some picket ships(expendable)/subs need to be out looking for this kind of raid in addition to the air search.

The biggest shortcoming is that Japan has initially is his planes...here you fought with your cream against his training dredges flying outdated frames. No surprise at the result. One decent squadron of Zeroes and torpedoes could really have changed the outcome...of course Japan wants to use that squadron elsewhere.

My solution here is to upgrade the restricted 4th Sentai (I believe) to Nicks and use them strictly to counter this kind of raid losing them as a training platform.

I think this kind of raid, at least an attempt at it, will become SOP for Allied players. Along with SST raids....which means that Japan needs to think of the HI as more than just a training base for pilots starting in 1941.

Anyhow, I did a smaller scale raid with 2 carriers in my AAR in an Ironman Nasty (AndyMac) game (versus the AI). For giggles I ran a trial turn letting the Carriers hang around for a day two, after the initial attack, and they were both sunk by overwhelming air power that was flown in despite hefty cap. I did not shore bombard.

So my takeaway from this kind of raid is that it is doable, but puts a lot at risk...you danced along the knife edge and got lucky with very few torpedoes. Perhaps the greatest victory is just doing this, putting Japan on notice that you can attack despite the victory point difference....influencing future strategy.

Nicely done.








(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 14
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/28/2014 3:12:36 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 3982
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Nice raid, especially so given the IJN has some of the western Aluetians.

For the Japanese, there is no reason why that first Kate strike didn't have torpedoes. There are several Air HQ restricted to the HI, and they should become bases in the north with torpedoes, hundreds of torpedoes and some of those northern airfields need to be expanded from day one.

The AA units not bought out need to be repositioned to help protect from this kind of raid, units repositioned and at least level one forts built up to protect from a base attack/raid. Probably can't afford to put minefields there to hurt shore bombardments, but if you don't use mini-subs much this might be a place for them. Put em there and forget about them.

Some picket ships(expendable)/subs need to be out looking for this kind of raid in addition to the air search.

The biggest shortcoming is that Japan has initially is his planes...here you fought with your cream against his training dredges flying outdated frames. No surprise at the result. One decent squadron of Zeroes and torpedoes could really have changed the outcome...of course Japan wants to use that squadron elsewhere.

My solution here is to upgrade the restricted 4th Sentai (I believe) to Nicks and use them strictly to counter this kind of raid losing them as a training platform.

I think this kind of raid, at least an attempt at it, will become SOP for Allied players. Along with SST raids....which means that Japan needs to think of the HI as more than just a training base for pilots starting in 1941.

Anyhow, I did a smaller scale raid with 2 carriers in my AAR in an Ironman Nasty (AndyMac) game (versus the AI). For giggles I ran a trial turn letting the Carriers hang around for a day two, after the initial attack, and they were both sunk by overwhelming air power that was flown in despite hefty cap. I did not shore bombard.

So my takeaway from this kind of raid is that it is doable, but puts a lot at risk...you danced along the knife edge and got lucky with very few torpedoes. Perhaps the greatest victory is just doing this, putting Japan on notice that you can attack despite the victory point difference....influencing future strategy.

Nicely done.



I had intelligence that the 11th Air Division was based at Bihoro, and the airfield there was expanding. I expected at least a unit of Nells. Recently got intel that 51st Air Div is at Bihoro now, so I wonder where the 11th went off to.

Also had sig int that an AA unit was at Sapporo, but I don't know how good it was. The 7th Division was split up, with one third at Kushiro. I assume another third at Sapporo, and the other probably at Bihoro. Not that I intended to land anyway.

I'm not sure why the Kates didn't have torpedoes. There should be an air HQ at Tokyo or Yokohama, which would have had command range to the Kates. He probably forgot in his rush to respond. Or perhaps they were all used up on the Nells. I got lucky that the 6 drops against Yorktown didn't hit anything; those aerial torpedoes pack a punch.

Funny you mention picket ships. He had some out, what I call "PB Marus" (tuna boats basically), but they were south of the Aleutians. I almost ran into some on the initial run south of Amchitka, and they reminded me to take my SBDs off of naval search because he should have gotten a sniff of my CVs when there was an "SBD-3 sights PB XXXX Maru" just south of Adak - outside of search range of any SBDs from Umnak (there are none there).

Isn't the 4th Sentai the one that starts in Formosa? At least, most of it. And it's white-restricted, right?

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 15
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/28/2014 3:30:50 PM   
cohimbra


Posts: 497
Joined: 10/15/2011
From: oil & wine land
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna
Isn't the 4th Sentai the one that starts in Formosa? At least, most of it. And it's white-restricted, right?

The 4th Sentai is white-restricted, but Formosa bases are attached to General Defense Army, the same HQ of the japanese home bases. So you can move the two Det (A/B) that started at Takao to Japan (the rest of 4th Sentai started at Fukuoka).


< Message edited by cohimbra -- 4/28/2014 4:32:19 PM >

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 16
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/28/2014 4:05:26 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 3982
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cohimbra

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna
Isn't the 4th Sentai the one that starts in Formosa? At least, most of it. And it's white-restricted, right?

The 4th Sentai is white-restricted, but Formosa bases are attached to General Defense Army, the same HQ of the japanese home bases. So you can move the two Det (A/B) that started at Takao to Japan (the rest of 4th Sentai started at Fukuoka).



Ah, so it is that group, then. I've usually left them as Nates because I can't spare the Nicks that early. And as Nates, they aren't able to make the hop from Formosa to Japan.

< Message edited by Lokasenna -- 4/28/2014 5:05:46 PM >

(in reply to cohimbra)
Post #: 17
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/28/2014 4:11:18 PM   
Lowpe

 

Posts: 5903
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: online
The 4th is a strange beast, split into thirds with some fighters and some recon but can hop around General Defense bases nicely.

They can even be trained up as some extra HI ASW platforms...it is a nice squadron. Nicks are so versatile....

I think Nates can make the trip using drop tanks.

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 4/28/2014 5:16:10 PM >

(in reply to cohimbra)
Post #: 18
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/28/2014 6:30:56 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 3079
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
Nice raid, buy honestly I think you got lucky. Not in anything you did, your raid was well thought out and you were prepared to pull the plug if detected earlier, but rather the fact your opponent seems to have been rather lax.

From my own experience playing Japan, I concentrate on upgrading all naval air units to the best available aircraft for exactly this reason, to prevent or strike back effectively at just such a raid. It looks like his air HQ's were not even equipped with torpedoes initially. The biggest failure was the lack of air or naval search to give any kind of warning, especially the failure to spot your bombarding TF's. I have to admit that a Japanese player having substantial naval assets in place to counter a raid of this magnitude in 4/42 would be highly unlikely. I think he didn't consider a raid against the Home Islands or the Kuriles as a possibility and his defences clearly showed this. Perhaps his position in the Aleutians made him complacent of just such a raid and never expected a raid to be launched without much of the Aleutians being Allied control.

Well done, but this wouldn't have been a cake walk against a Japanese player that put some effort into establishing effective air search around the Home Islands in the first few weeks of the war. I'm pretty defensive minded though so I'm biased in that regard.

As to SOP for Allied players in the future. I'm not sure I'd go that far. Is the risk of losing CV's worth the strategic VP's this early in the game? Don't a number of Japanese aircraft CV's upgrade at this time too? There is always the possibility that there could have been Japanese CV's available pretty close to the Home Islands at the time of this raid. Still, credit where credit is due, a gutsy move and you caught your opponent completely unprepared. I know that feeling well.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 4/28/2014 7:40:14 PM >


_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 19
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/28/2014 8:08:23 PM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 3982
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Nice raid, buy honestly I think you got lucky. Not in anything you did, your raid was well thought out and you were prepared to pull the plug if detected earlier, but rather the fact your opponent seems to have been rather lax.

From my own experience playing Japan, I concentrate on upgrading all naval air units to the best available aircraft for exactly this reason, to prevent or strike back effectively at just such a raid. It looks like his air HQ's were not even equipped with torpedoes initially. The biggest failure was the lack of air or naval search to give any kind of warning, especially the failure to spot your bombarding TF's. I have to admit that a Japanese player having substantial naval assets in place to counter a raid of this magnitude in 4/42 would be highly unlikely. I think he didn't consider a raid against the Home Islands or the Kuriles as a possibility and his defences clearly showed this. Perhaps his position in the Aleutians made him complacent of just such a raid and never expected a raid to be launched without much of the Aleutians being Allied control.

Well done, but this wouldn't have been a cake walk against a Japanese player that put some effort into establishing effective air search around the Home Islands in the first few weeks of the war. I'm pretty defensive minded though so I'm biased in that regard.

As to SOP for Allied players in the future. I'm not sure I'd go that far. Is the risk of losing CV's worth the strategic VP's this early in the game? Don't a number of Japanese aircraft CV's upgrade at this time too? There is always the possibility that there could have been Japanese CV's available pretty close to the Home Islands at the time of this raid. Still, credit where credit is due, a gutsy move and you caught your opponent completely unprepared. I know that feeling well.


I've said the same thing in IM conversations with a friend of mine who is familiar with the game but doesn't play. The weather was working against my opponent, but he also could have had much better air search. I was commenting that I couldn't have pulled this off any earlier, due to my loss of Lexington, as I think this requires 4 CVs. Maybe a couple of days earlier if I'd planned ahead with Enterprise, but Hornet basically arrived and set sail once Big E had returned to Pearl.

If anything, I'm most surprised that the CV forces were detected and the more southerly forces weren't, particularly with Bullwinkle's landing in the recent past. I sighted no planes on southerly search arcs whatsoever, and even the sightings due east of Honshu appeared to have originated from Hokkaido. Granted, in my game I have search arcs covering the whole coast in every direction, but they failed to detect Bullwinkle's approach (my Mavis pilots flew right over them at least 3 times).

As for SOP... I think the attempt should at least be SOP. Beyond spring 1942, the CVs have other uses. In the first half of 1942, the USN should simply be where the KB isn't, as the tools simply aren't there to conduct a major defense or start a counter-offensive.

I'm not sure if the air HQs would have made any difference, except against Colorado and the CLs. The CLs were sunk anyway. Even if I'd lost Colorado, it would still have been at least a 3:1 VP gain for me. The major error was the lack of suitable naval search, and the followup error of not being able to commit front line planes (Zeroes on CAP, at least) the day after detection.


For the record, MM's position in the Aleutians is extremely minor. Very few LCUs, very few ships, and not many aircraft. He seems to have concluded that they aren't worth holding, so I'll go collect some LCU VPs shortly. There's a regiment on Adak with no airfield, which says to me that he doesn't want to build it up only for me to take it from him. I think this is a mistake on his part, as flying planes in doesn't really use any Fuel other than what's used to get the aviation support in place. Which can also be flown in, if he really tries. Perhaps he couldn't have known that I'd be ready to conduct an attack on the base by May or June, but he's been in possession for several months already. I expect moderate fortifications, but nothing my forces can't handle.

He is probably flying search, I believe Mavis or Jake unit(s) out of Attu with AV or CS support. Airfield size there is 1. Airfield at Amchitka is 2.

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 20
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/28/2014 9:30:14 PM   
Lowpe

 

Posts: 5903
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: online
Jakes don't go out far enough, and Mavis are prone to breaking down. The further north you go the iffier the weather....

My point is the attempt at something here will be SOP especially when the KB is on the other side.


(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 21
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/28/2014 10:09:06 PM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 3079
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

My point is the attempt at something here will be SOP especially when the KB is on the other side.


My point was that against a properly prepared Japanese player a raid such as this could turn into an early war disaster for the Allied player. In this case the Japanese player was completely unprepared, that won't always be the case.

And I wouldn't be relying on Jake's or Mavis's for search in the early war in areas that matter. I'd set my Nell's and Betty's to search first, then switch them over to attack. If there had been Betty/Nell search committed there's a good chance all the bombardment TF's would have been spotted in time to prepare a much more effective air counterstroke. I'm still pretty leery about risking the Allied CV's for strategic VP's that could easily be gained in 44/45 rather than 42. I get the psychological aspect to Lokasenna's raid, but don't think this type of operation will/should become SOP for Allied players. Unless you are staving off auto-victory and absolutely need the VP's, I just don't see the risk/reward being worth the potential losses. I'm a conservative player though.


< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 4/28/2014 11:16:55 PM >


_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 22
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/28/2014 10:22:59 PM   
obvert


Posts: 8571
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
Nice move. Well planned and executed.

Pickets out there, as were used by Japan, would have caught you out several days before the strike. I'm stunned at the small number of aircraft attacking your fleet. There are a lot more there training, for sure, and pilots can be swapped in a day.

This will at least mean many japanese players will have to deal with HI defense more effectively in the future.

_____________________________


"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 23
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/29/2014 12:23:50 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 3982
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

My point is the attempt at something here will be SOP especially when the KB is on the other side.


My point was that against a properly prepared Japanese player a raid such as this could turn into an early war disaster for the Allied player. In this case the Japanese player was completely unprepared, that won't always be the case.


I wouldn't say completely, just inadequately prepared. He knew it was a danger zone, but underestimated the forces necessary to protect himself. He also underestimated my strength in the area. It really was more than just the USN CVs.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon
And I wouldn't be relying on Jake's or Mavis's for search in the early war in areas that matter. I'd set my Nell's and Betty's to search first, then switch them over to attack. If there had been Betty/Nell search committed there's a good chance all the bombardment TF's would have been spotted in time to prepare a much more effective air counterstroke. I'm still pretty leery about risking the Allied CV's for strategic VP's that could easily be gained in 44/45 rather than 42. I get the psychological aspect to Lokasenna's raid, but don't think this type of operation will/should become SOP for Allied players. Unless you are staving off auto-victory and absolutely need the VP's, I just don't see the risk/reward being worth the potential losses. I'm a conservative player though.



One of the things factoring into my considerations for this raid were the sheer number of attack aircraft he has committed elsewhere. Just on this past turn, there were at least 50 Netties, 40+ Zeroes, and 15+ Oscars in NW Australia. Combine this with the apparent commitment of another Nell/Betty unit at Rabaul or Moresby, plus a Sally and a Lily unit at Rabaul or Moresby (the 3 of them were used to bomb Horn Island), and Mavis sightings in the South Pacific... I knew his air assets were spread very thin at home and in the north, just from what I saw elsewhere. And they still are. I intend to conduct my operations accordingly.

It wasn't just the USN CVs, but I weighed the risk and deemed it to be low, while the payoff was large. I knew where KB was, where MKB was, within the past 2 weeks. Granted, the coast of Honshu off Tokyo is only a few days' sail from Truk if the KB goes at full speed, but that's a dangerous use of fuel for 3-4 successive days. Not to mention the Sys/Eng damage buildup.

I did absolutely need the VPs. I probably should have held longer in China, and it's going to cost me Chungking very early as MM is willing to beat the crap out of his divisions to batter down my forts. In his last attack he dropped the forts from 5 to 4, but suffered over 30,000 disabled/destroyed troops. Very expensive for him, but I'm looking at losing Chungking while my VPs are still below 10,000. I would have been past a 3:1 in his favor with the fall of Bataan on May 1 (where he beat up 3 of his other divisions as well in successive attacks for almost a week) without this raid. I'll lose 800 when he takes Chungking, and he'll gain 1600 plus a ton for the troops. Even if I'd traded only 2:1 on this raid, it would still have accomplished its secondary objective of gaining ground in the VP race. 300 strat VPs is a pittance in the long run, but this wasn't about the long run.

(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 24
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/29/2014 12:25:28 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 3982
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: obvert

Nice move. Well planned and executed.

Pickets out there, as were used by Japan, would have caught you out several days before the strike. I'm stunned at the small number of aircraft attacking your fleet. There are a lot more there training, for sure, and pilots can be swapped in a day.

This will at least mean many japanese players will have to deal with HI defense more effectively in the future.


Thanks .

I know he had at least some pickets out. I tracked one down with 3 DDs from Dutch Harbor, south of the Aleutians. I didn't want him stumbling upon any of my withdrawing escort TFs.

I think he has/had several more out and about, as he mentioned a "tuna boat screen" in that email. That, to me, says he had multiple boats out. I have no idea how many, though.

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 25
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/29/2014 12:26:44 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 3982
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Jakes don't go out far enough, and Mavis are prone to breaking down. The further north you go the iffier the weather....

My point is the attempt at something here will be SOP especially when the KB is on the other side.




I agree that Jakes aren't sufficient. You can't beat the range on the Mavis, nor its utility in being a seaplane. It's ideal for small island bases. That doesn't really apply to much in the area around the Japan, but they could be based out of Marcus Island, for example... Or the Kuriles.

Early on, it's hard to have enough Nells to take over search duties, but it's definitely something that should be done.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 26
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/29/2014 3:57:35 AM   
SqzMyLemon


Posts: 3079
Joined: 10/30/2009
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to say it wasn't a good operation. You did your homework and it paid off.

I was trying to urge caution about the SOP comment by Lowpe. I fully believe that a Japanese player can protect the Kuriles and Home Islands from just such a raid while still having all the bells and whistles for the early conquests. In this case, as you point out, your opponent was thin at home and vulnerable. That won't always be the case and I caution anyone saying this type of raid will become SOP. Against a prepared Japanese opponent it could be seen as a high risk for little reward type enterprise.

I understand that you pursued the operation based on the game situation. Not everyone will show the due diligence you did and might end up blundering into a disaster. I'm only advising caution to those that think this is something that can be pulled off every game.

< Message edited by SqzMyLemon -- 4/29/2014 4:59:01 AM >


_____________________________

Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)

(in reply to Lokasenna)
Post #: 27
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/29/2014 4:07:33 AM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 19403
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to say it wasn't a good operation. You did your homework and it paid off.

I was trying to urge caution about the SOP comment by Lowpe. I fully believe that a Japanese player can protect the Kuriles and Home Islands from just such a raid while still having all the bells and whistles for the early conquests. In this case, as you point out, your opponent was thin at home and vulnerable. That won't always be the case and I caution anyone saying this type of raid will become SOP. Against a prepared Japanese opponent it could be seen as a high risk for little reward type enterprise.

I understand that you pursued the operation based on the game situation. Not everyone will show the due diligence you did and might end up blundering into a disaster. I'm only advising caution to those that think this is something that can be pulled off every game.


No. You're wrong.

This raid will work against all Japanese players. Always. It should be consistently tried. Preferably with valuable Allied forces. Allied carriers should be involved to cover the operation-preferably prior to their upgrades or new airframes. Early 1942 (January?) would be best.

_____________________________


(in reply to SqzMyLemon)
Post #: 28
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/29/2014 4:16:03 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 16527
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to say it wasn't a good operation. You did your homework and it paid off.

I was trying to urge caution about the SOP comment by Lowpe. I fully believe that a Japanese player can protect the Kuriles and Home Islands from just such a raid while still having all the bells and whistles for the early conquests. In this case, as you point out, your opponent was thin at home and vulnerable. That won't always be the case and I caution anyone saying this type of raid will become SOP. Against a prepared Japanese opponent it could be seen as a high risk for little reward type enterprise.

I understand that you pursued the operation based on the game situation. Not everyone will show the due diligence you did and might end up blundering into a disaster. I'm only advising caution to those that think this is something that can be pulled off every game.


No. You're wrong.

This raid will work against all Japanese players. Always. It should be consistently tried. Preferably with valuable Allied forces. Allied carriers should be involved to cover the operation-preferably prior to their upgrades or new airframes. Early 1942 (January?) would be best.

Aren't you supposed to be sitting in a sauna healing bruises or somethin'?

_____________________________


(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 29
RE: Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - N... - 4/29/2014 4:37:49 AM   
Lokasenna


Posts: 3982
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to say it wasn't a good operation. You did your homework and it paid off.

I was trying to urge caution about the SOP comment by Lowpe. I fully believe that a Japanese player can protect the Kuriles and Home Islands from just such a raid while still having all the bells and whistles for the early conquests. In this case, as you point out, your opponent was thin at home and vulnerable. That won't always be the case and I caution anyone saying this type of raid will become SOP. Against a prepared Japanese opponent it could be seen as a high risk for little reward type enterprise.

I understand that you pursued the operation based on the game situation. Not everyone will show the due diligence you did and might end up blundering into a disaster. I'm only advising caution to those that think this is something that can be pulled off every game.


No. You're wrong.

This raid will work against all Japanese players. Always. It should be consistently tried. Preferably with valuable Allied forces. Allied carriers should be involved to cover the operation-preferably prior to their upgrades or new airframes. Early 1942 (January?) would be best.


Can't tell if you're serious, heh.

January is the earliest possible sortie date, if you want to use 4 CVs... I still think it's worth an attempt to make this sort of raid in every game to keep your opponent honest above all, but it really has to be before you're launching amphibious operations to avoid the opportunity cost of not having CVs to cover your offensive. If you get detected too soon, you bail. Obviously you don't risk getting detected when you don't know where KB is.

Even getting detected early serves the purpose of keeping your opponent honest in the defense of Japan.


Sure, PB screens could help in providing early warning, but if you're a crafty Allied player you could sink those PBs without letting him know what you're up to... It would require time and planning, and perhaps a bit of luck, but it's possible.

(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> Headhunter - Lokasenna (A) vs. mind_messing (J) - No MM yet Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   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

0.141