Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Implications

 
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: Implications Page: <<   < prev  64 65 [66] 67 68   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Implications - 4/11/2016 5:10:36 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16381
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Lowpe: They are not as good as I would care for. Seemingly have TK running everywhere and hauling it to the Home Isle but my levels are not going up that fast. I've had to use soooo many AK to move troops around (at this late stage of the game) that that has served to cause a few issues as well. I've decided to get the redeployment done and then move as many of those AKs as possible to Soerabaja and Singers to created some 250,000+ Resource convoys and get a BUNCH home ASAP.

All four BC and Ise are now upgrading at Singers. Yamato is headed home where she will rejoin her sister who is almost repaired at Nagasaki. They will link-up with the two CB and bombard eht eHell out of the Aleuts. There is no doubt that Dan will come back there before winter arrives. Mark THIS. I will hurt the Allies in the Aleutians before summer is done.

Pull the other half of KB from Attu so it 'disappears.' Let Dan worry about that for a while.

Three of my newly available ID will move to the Marianas and finish stocking them to the gills. Moving a good number of troops (mainly support) to Babeldoap and Mindanao to begin serious defensive work.

Dan has gone back to his (what a TRULY LOVE) one and two ship TF north of Marcus. I will KILL them with three Moon-Class DDs.


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1951
RE: Implications - 4/11/2016 6:25:20 PM   
Bif1961


Posts: 1627
Joined: 6/26/2008
From: Phenix City, Alabama
Status: online
Congrats on Sabang bagging, ultimately 60,000-70,000 allied troops. It would be nice if there were some announcements in the game when a debacle of this scale happens. Good thing Dan is Supreme Commander or head would have rolled for losing so many combat units in reality. Thi game lacks the political decision which colored real operations during WWII.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1952
RE: Implications - 4/11/2016 7:01:24 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9586
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
Always felt that VPs should be flexible. Allies should lose three times the amount of VPs for losing a carrier in 1944-45 where the Japanese should lose virtually nothing. Then the reverse happens in 1942 where the Japanese should lose three times for a carrier and the Allies very little. Simply that in the normal context of things it is expected that Japanese warships are going to get hammered late in the war, and they really do not help as much. And, for the Allies to lose five CVs in late 44-well there would be some heads rolling....

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to Bif1961)
Post #: 1953
RE: Implications - 4/12/2016 5:31:50 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16381
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
I like that idea Mr. Sutton. Makes a bunch of sense.

Looks like my Noble Allied Opponent is quitting the Marshalls and Gilberts to get ready for his next lunge. Anyone wanna bet on the rest of the Aleutians? That is where my chips are going.

We have been going back-and-forth about our ages. I turn the ripe old age of 50 pretty soon. With him moving out of the fighting area, I taunted him with my last email. The message said:

My B-Day is on Cinco de Mayo except we call it Cinco de Johno! I’ve had this birthday for nearly as long as Cinco de Mayo and they still haven’t asked me to be the parade GRAND MARSHALL. Quite rude...

My engineers as well as pilots wish to thank the Allied engineers for the tremendous AF they have built for Japan at Sabang.

Additionally, it LOOKS like you’re leaving the party in the Marshalls and Gilberts. That is too bad. It was just really getting fun. You are now an APP. That would be an ALLIED PARTY POOPER!

Hope you laughed. Work from now til 3pm.



< Message edited by John 3rd -- 4/12/2016 5:33:27 PM >


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 1954
RE: Implications - 4/12/2016 5:38:00 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 6892
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: offline
Seriously John?

You're ballyhooing this great success in a scenario you designed to allow for that very thing?

Seems more than a bit immodest.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1955
RE: Implications - 4/12/2016 7:08:07 PM   
pws1225

 

Posts: 1163
Joined: 8/9/2010
From: Tate's Hell, Florida
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

Seriously John?

You're ballyhooing this great success in a scenario you designed to allow for that very thing?

Seems more than a bit immodest.


I must respectfully disagree. As any JFB knows, when you start a game, either a stock scenario or a mod like this one, you know from the outset you are probably going to lose. Similarly, as any AFB know, you know you are probably going to win. The only question is whether the Allies will win sooner or later than historical. The enhanced Japanese OOB in this mod at best forestalls the inevitable perhaps 6 months or so, but does not change the systemic imbalance between the two sides. The only way the Japanese player can hope to win is by decisively crippling the Allied OOB which John may have done here (only time will tell). In that perspective, I think John deserves a hearty well done. He may not have won the war at Sabang, but he has certainly increased his chances.

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 1956
RE: Implications - 4/12/2016 7:56:13 PM   
obvert


Posts: 12940
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pws1225


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

Seriously John?

You're ballyhooing this great success in a scenario you designed to allow for that very thing?

Seems more than a bit immodest.


I must respectfully disagree. As any JFB knows, when you start a game, either a stock scenario or a mod like this one, you know from the outset you are probably going to lose. Similarly, as any AFB know, you know you are probably going to win. The only question is whether the Allies will win sooner or later than historical. The enhanced Japanese OOB in this mod at best forestalls the inevitable perhaps 6 months or so, but does not change the systemic imbalance between the two sides. The only way the Japanese player can hope to win is by decisively crippling the Allied OOB which John may have done here (only time will tell). In that perspective, I think John deserves a hearty well done. He may not have won the war at Sabang, but he has certainly increased his chances.



+1

He was patient and persistent in a very difficult situation. A little ribbing doesn't hurt if you're tight with the other player, and when you know for sure it'll be coming the other way at some point.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to pws1225)
Post #: 1957
RE: Implications - 4/13/2016 12:50:20 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16381
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

Seriously John?

You're ballyhooing this great success in a scenario you designed to allow for that very thing?

Seems more than a bit immodest.


I believe that I was JOKING with him. As Obvert points out, our relationship now spans better then a decade of time. We have spoken many times on the phone and he has been there for me in a horrific situation. It is absolutely safe to do so because he'll fire it right back to me in a while.


Would ALSO point out to you that this Mod is predominantly a NAVAL Mod. The war at sea is where that impact is. I beat Dan in Burma AND Sumatra using the Scenario ONE Imperial Japanese Army...to me that is cause for some serious partying.

Considering my greatest weaknesses are in the Ground War AND patience this victory in Sumatra really means a lot. My greatest strength AND weakness is always wanting to quickly attack or counter-punch. Witness the very conversation over the last 12-15 Posts. Sumatra was tough, tough test of patience, details, and organization. To destroy this massive a number of units and troops in mid-43 is pretty unheard of to my knowledge.

Serious Question: Does anyone know of another Japanese Player who had something similar to this occur at this stage of the war? Better yet--lots of JFB read this AAR so how about you sound off on what YOU consider to be your best moment in a campaign. Sound off and take some pride in accomplishment. Let us hear it!




_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 1958
RE: Implications - 4/13/2016 1:20:10 AM   
pws1225

 

Posts: 1163
Joined: 8/9/2010
From: Tate's Hell, Florida
Status: offline
quote:

Sound off and take some pride in accomplishment. Let us hear it!


Don't mind if I do.

In my last PBEM, I managed to catch my opponent loading of his amphibs in the New Hebrides for his first offensive in mid-43. I think KB destroyed around two to three IDs, multiple other LCU, not to mention all the available Allied APs, AKs. In truth, it was blind dumb luck on my part, but I chalked up my first win and simply enjoyed the hell out of it.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1959
RE: Implications - 4/13/2016 1:41:39 AM   
SierraJuliet


Posts: 2082
Joined: 2/23/2009
From: Brisbane, Australia
Status: offline
Late war in the old WITP and I managed to get 3 Kongos to stalk and then pounce on a USN fast carrier TF at night. If memory serves me correctly they accounted for BB Iowa and 2 Essex class carriers before hightailing it. A very sweet result. It was cartwheel time during the bleak days seeing out the end of the war.

I'm sure Todd remembers well and will be looking to stymie any efforts I make in our current game to pull off further blue water intercepts.

(in reply to pws1225)
Post #: 1960
RE: Implications - 4/13/2016 2:08:20 AM   
Lowpe


Posts: 17342
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
I sank an American sub in August of 1944.

At least the pilot reported it sunk.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1961
RE: Implications - 4/13/2016 6:21:32 AM   
njp72

 

Posts: 933
Joined: 9/20/2008
Status: offline
LOL, now I can relate to this


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

I sank an American sub in August of 1944.

At least the pilot reported it sunk.


(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1962
RE: Implications - 4/13/2016 12:03:32 PM   
obvert


Posts: 12940
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline
For me the highlight was being able to still fight in 45 in my game with Jocke. Those late strikes around Korea kept me in the game for a few more weeks and just felt good after months of getting stomped on all fronts.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to njp72)
Post #: 1963
RE: Implications - 4/13/2016 3:14:41 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9586
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
I had a flaming Japanese betty pilot go kamikaze on me in late 1944. Put a magazine explosion on an Iowa class BB, but that was about it. A good Allied player should not need to lose a division size unit after the initial early war disasters. (China excepted). I actually pulled that off in my first campaign by managed to lose a first class Australian division in a poorly planned and premature attempt to take Port Blair in my current campaign. I personally think that even with Da Babes that it is way too easy for the Allied player to pull off fantastic invasions in 1942-43. (Not to mention Japan) I really try to play a more realistic and historical game but if either player is willing to risk losing units, there can be some big payoffs.

The loss at Sumatra was a serious one for Dan but speaking from the Allied perspective, I do not see it as a disaster. I have always said that if the Allies do not lose their carriers in 42-43 that they can pretty much survive any other sort of blow. The real decision will come at sea. Whoever wins the "big" carrier fight will have the edge. It matters little how many divisions a player has if he does not have control of the sea. Auto victory aside, the only major Japanese victories that I have seen have come with the total smashing of the Allied navy. Calling this one a draw so far. Lots more action to come.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 1964
RE: Implications - 4/13/2016 9:30:32 PM   
Mike McCreery


Posts: 4178
Joined: 6/29/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

I had a flaming Japanese betty pilot go kamikaze on me in late 1944. Put a magazine explosion on an Iowa class BB, but that was about it. A good Allied player should not need to lose a division size unit after the initial early war disasters. (China excepted). I actually pulled that off in my first campaign by managed to lose a first class Australian division in a poorly planned and premature attempt to take Port Blair in my current campaign. I personally think that even with Da Babes that it is way too easy for the Allied player to pull off fantastic invasions in 1942-43. (Not to mention Japan) I really try to play a more realistic and historical game but if either player is willing to risk losing units, there can be some big payoffs.

The loss at Sumatra was a serious one for Dan but speaking from the Allied perspective, I do not see it as a disaster. I have always said that if the Allies do not lose their carriers in 42-43 that they can pretty much survive any other sort of blow. The real decision will come at sea. Whoever wins the "big" carrier fight will have the edge. It matters little how many divisions a player has if he does not have control of the sea. Auto victory aside, the only major Japanese victories that I have seen have come with the total smashing of the Allied navy. Calling this one a draw so far. Lots more action to come.


I agree here. Maneuver warfare is the key to the game and if you control the seas you have superior control over maneuver in many locations.



_____________________________


(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 1965
RE: Implications - 4/13/2016 10:32:09 PM   
Olorin


Posts: 997
Joined: 4/22/2008
From: Greece
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Serious Question: Does anyone know of another Japanese Player who had something similar to this occur at this stage of the war? Better yet--lots of JFB read this AAR so how about you sound off on what YOU consider to be your best moment in a campaign. Sound off and take some pride in accomplishment. Let us hear it!


I think Michael (NYGiants) could add his experience on this matter.

6 American divisions, 300 tanks and 500 airplanes were destroyed in August '43 in Western Australia in a brilliantly planned and executed envelopment. 150.000 Americans, including McArthur, became prisoners of war.

Edit: We continued playing until September '44. What the effect on the Allied war effort and replacement pools was, was hard to tell from my side. Maybe Michael has the answer.


< Message edited by Olorin -- 4/13/2016 10:42:12 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1966
RE: Implications - 4/14/2016 1:11:55 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 6892
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: offline
You are all very welcome!

The stream of "yes we have justifiable reason to celebrate" posts would never have happened had I not thrown down the gauntlet.


_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to Olorin)
Post #: 1967
RE: Implications - 4/14/2016 1:17:13 PM   
Grfin Zeppelin


Posts: 1516
Joined: 12/3/2007
From: Germany
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

You are all very welcome!

The stream of "yes we have justifiable reason to celebrate" posts would never have happened had I not thrown down the gauntlet.


"I am part of that power which eternally wills AFB and eternally works JFB."

< Message edited by Gräfin Zeppelin -- 4/14/2016 1:18:30 PM >


_____________________________



(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 1968
I-Boats - 4/14/2016 1:46:16 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16381
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
I need to seriously update my individual subs tally sheet but the success of my Submarine Arm has been amazing. Here is the exodus from the Marshalls--Gilberts with Japan's I-Boats striking yet once again.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Grfin Zeppelin)
Post #: 1969
RE: I-Boats - 4/14/2016 2:05:05 PM   
ny59giants_MatrixForum


Posts: 9707
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
You have until mid-Sept until the Americans start producing at least 6 to 8 DEs per month forever and ever.

_____________________________


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1970
RE: I-Boats - 4/14/2016 2:29:37 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16381
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Thanks for that joyful news!

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to ny59giants_MatrixForum)
Post #: 1971
RE: I-Boats - 4/14/2016 2:39:11 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 6892
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

You have until mid-Sept until the Americans start producing at least 6 to 8 DEs per month forever and ever.


Don't forget the Patrol Frigates with 11 ASW value!

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to ny59giants_MatrixForum)
Post #: 1972
RE: Implications - 4/14/2016 11:32:08 PM   
obvert


Posts: 12940
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gräfin Zeppelin

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

You are all very welcome!

The stream of "yes we have justifiable reason to celebrate" posts would never have happened had I not thrown down the gauntlet.


"I am part of that power which eternally wills AFB and eternally works JFB."


Love it!!

(Hi from Bonn tonight Graffin!)

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Grfin Zeppelin)
Post #: 1973
RE: I-Boats - 4/14/2016 11:50:58 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 17342
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


quote:

ORIGINAL: ny59giants

You have until mid-Sept until the Americans start producing at least 6 to 8 DEs per month forever and ever.


Don't forget the Patrol Frigates with 11 ASW value!


Really? I could use a few of those!

It really is disappointing you can't board and capture some of the smaller ships.

(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 1974
RE: I-Boats - 4/15/2016 12:06:42 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16381
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Don't be giving away my FIRST Commando Operation. We're sneaking into San Fran and stealing the first six of these wessels. Shhhhhhh...don't tell Dan....

< Message edited by John 3rd -- 4/15/2016 12:07:56 AM >


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 1975
New Looks - 4/15/2016 6:52:15 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16381
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Drat. Gave the Allies a small gift this day. Had a TF carrying a Construction Bn, Base Force, and Infantry Coy preparing to land at Abemanna near Tarawa and set my 60+ Fighters at Tabitueau to fly LRCAP. Weather closed in and shut down Tabit and so the TF tried to unload and got PASTED by SBDs. Lost ten small AK/AKL. Doesn't count for many points but still sucks.

On the BRIGHT side it tells me what Dan left at Tarawa. There are roughly 25 Fighters and 50 SBD. Well...we can do something about that. Time to prepare a CAP Trap. Detach two AKs from a convoy just a day away. They will go to Tabit and then get nearly 100 Fighters assigned as CAP. We'll send them north and TRASH this strike force from Tarawa. Won't bring back the lost ships but it will provide some good therapy for the Japanese player.


_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1976
New Looks - 4/15/2016 4:06:18 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 16381
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
With the Allied Fleet pulled out of the Marshalls, it is time to prepare for the next assault. Need to improve my warning time for Allied Ops. Am taking two steps:

1. Have decided to improve my warning time of operations by ordering 4 Long-Range I-Boats and 5 Glen-Equipped I-Boats to move to the Pearl Harbor area. Time to do some sight-seeing. Pull an additional 4 Glen Boats from the IO and they are ordered to move UP NORTH where they will do long-range scouting SE of the Aleutians.

2. Have a group of 6 small AK about the deploy in a scouting line between the Aleutians and Pearl Harbor/West Coast. Dan does this all the time so I have decided that turn about is fair play.

The ENTIRE Carrier Fleet is now upgraded. I am moving the Fleet to Marcus where it shall wait. This primitive base is perfect for either moving north and moving south quickly. The next Allied Operation shall be fully resisted by the Kido Butai.




_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1977
RE: New Looks - 4/15/2016 4:14:27 PM   
HansBolter


Posts: 6892
Joined: 7/6/2006
From: St. Petersburg, Florida, USA
Status: offline
It's about time we saw a knock down drag out carrier battle in this dustup.

_____________________________

Hans


(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 1978
RE: New Looks - 4/15/2016 4:26:36 PM   
ny59giants_MatrixForum


Posts: 9707
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
quote:

The ENTIRE Carrier Fleet is now upgraded. I am moving the Fleet to Marcus where it shall wait. This primitive base is perfect for either moving north and moving south quickly. The next Allied Operation shall be fully resisted by the Kido Butai


1. Mine the base and include ACMs to maintain.
2. Disband just the CV/CVLs so a lucky American sub doesn't put a hole somewhere.
3. FP group there to provide close in ASW search.
4. AOs move here.

_____________________________


(in reply to HansBolter)
Post #: 1979
RE: New Looks - 4/15/2016 4:50:43 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 17342
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
My experience has been if you take all the CV/CVL/CVE out of a task force it will revert to Surface TF and when you transfer the CVs back in you cannot move back to Air Combat. I am probably doing something wrong.

Could hurt if you picked a good task force commander.

I would urge caution on your use of the KB. Even in this mod, strength versus strength doesn't seem to work very often for Japan from 43 onward. He has better radars, better fighters. Be sly on using the KB. I am not sure sure when you will get better fighters, but you get some nifty ones in the mod later.

Of course, this is your strength, so feel free to do whatever you think best.

Max your search, make him come to you, and pick your battlefield. IMHO.



< Message edited by Lowpe -- 4/15/2016 4:52:39 PM >

(in reply to ny59giants_MatrixForum)
Post #: 1980
Page:   <<   < prev  64 65 [66] 67 68   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Implications Page: <<   < prev  64 65 [66] 67 68   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

0.168