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: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi

 
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: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/9/2019 10:02:56 AM   
Cheesesteak


Posts: 115
Joined: 11/8/2010
From: Richmond, VA
Status: offline
Greetings from my travels! Fins has been running the allied forces solo while I'm abroad. He can provide an update, but it's from news. Admiral King would be fuming at us, and demanding more resources be diverted from Europe.

Tried to upload a picture of Salzburg castle or my breakfast beer in Belgium, but no dice.

(in reply to aaffins)
Post #: 181
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/9/2019 10:16:19 AM   
Cheesesteak


Posts: 115
Joined: 11/8/2010
From: Richmond, VA
Status: offline
I'll ask someone *ahem* closer to home to fill in the gaps, but I've been thoroughly entertained by the ebbs and flows. It seems our opponent has an expert level use of subs. Once more info has been provided to contextualize my question, I'd love to hear how allied players go about maximizing use of their CVs. Negative space, splitting them, selecting targets of opportunity when every major landing is covered by KB or MiniKB, etc.

(in reply to Cheesesteak)
Post #: 182
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/9/2019 3:56:32 PM   
Bif1961


Posts: 1584
Joined: 6/26/2008
From: Phenix City, Alabama
Status: offline
Avoid the KB if it is together. Combine your carriers in no more than 2 carrier per TF. then keep them mutually supporting carrier TFs and hunt the mini-KB if he is using it say in CBI or DEI away from the KB. Try not to make a move until you have recent intel where the KB is because 9 out of 10 times u got toe-to-toe with it before 1943 you will come out worse for the wear. If you hunt the KB and cripple it, he will be forced to make a decision about splitting the KB or not to cover the gap left by the diminished mini-KB or not go with carrier support of any decent size on part of the map. In early war it is important for the Allied side to hit the enemy where they ain't. Use as much naval recon as possible to see his intention as soon as possible and pool your resources to strike at his weakest link.

(in reply to Cheesesteak)
Post #: 183
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/10/2019 1:08:33 AM   
aaffins

 

Posts: 84
Joined: 3/7/2010
From: Richmond, VA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bif1961

Avoid the KB if it is together. Combine your carriers in no more than 2 carrier per TF. then keep them mutually supporting carrier TFs and hunt the mini-KB if he is using it say in CBI or DEI away from the KB. Try not to make a move until you have recent intel where the KB is because 9 out of 10 times u got toe-to-toe with it before 1943 you will come out worse for the wear. If you hunt the KB and cripple it, he will be forced to make a decision about splitting the KB or not to cover the gap left by the diminished mini-KB or not go with carrier support of any decent size on part of the map. In early war it is important for the Allied side to hit the enemy where they ain't. Use as much naval recon as possible to see his intention as soon as possible and pool your resources to strike at his weakest link.


Is there any special trick to the 2 carrier thing? I've read that on here and tried in my RA game against Cheesesteak and they just didn't do what I wanted. I had all my airgroups on their normal settings and they didn't do anything I expected, attacks were uncoordinated, etc.


(in reply to Bif1961)
Post #: 184
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/10/2019 2:07:52 AM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 13114
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: aaffins


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bif1961

Avoid the KB if it is together. Combine your carriers in no more than 2 carrier per TF. then keep them mutually supporting carrier TFs and hunt the mini-KB if he is using it say in CBI or DEI away from the KB. Try not to make a move until you have recent intel where the KB is because 9 out of 10 times u got toe-to-toe with it before 1943 you will come out worse for the wear. If you hunt the KB and cripple it, he will be forced to make a decision about splitting the KB or not to cover the gap left by the diminished mini-KB or not go with carrier support of any decent size on part of the map. In early war it is important for the Allied side to hit the enemy where they ain't. Use as much naval recon as possible to see his intention as soon as possible and pool your resources to strike at his weakest link.


Is there any special trick to the 2 carrier thing? I've read that on here and tried in my RA game against Cheesesteak and they just didn't do what I wanted. I had all my airgroups on their normal settings and they didn't do anything I expected, attacks were uncoordinated, etc.


Early in the game it is inexperience that contributes most to lack of coordination (assuming you got the altitude settings etc. correct). Not much you can do about that. The 2 CV idea is because there is a coordination penalty for having too many aircraft trying to launch together from the same TF. The number of aircraft varies by year, starting at something like 150, then going to 200 or so, etc. However other posters have ignored the limit and found that the penalty for exceeding the strike size limits is quite small.

IMO, the other thing to consider is whether a large TF is likely to have more collisions during maneuver. I think the high Naval skill of the ship and TF commanders assigned to CV TFs likely limits how big a problem that is, but I get nervous when I have over 15 ships in a CV TF. Others go up to the full limit of 25 in hopes of getting better AA coverage.


_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to aaffins)
Post #: 185
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/10/2019 5:10:29 PM   
Bif1961


Posts: 1584
Joined: 6/26/2008
From: Phenix City, Alabama
Status: offline
I limit my fleet CVs to no more than 2 per TF until 1944, though when I get my light carriers I will include 1 or 2 in a TF with 2 CVs, I use the CVLs for 100% CAP setting and their TB or DBs for ASW work.. I have multiple carrier TF set to reaction zero following the lead carrier TF, also set to reaction zero. This helps my carrier TF stay together and don't go charging off after the enemy carrier TFs, depending on the aggression rating of the TF Cdr. It works well the majority of the time but is not fool-proof. CVEs will be assigned to escort amphibious TF providing them with close CAP and ASW support.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 186
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/10/2019 7:43:03 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 13114
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bif1961

I limit my fleet CVs to no more than 2 per TF until 1944, though when I get my light carriers I will include 1 or 2 in a TF with 2 CVs, I use the CVLs for 100% CAP setting and their TB or DBs for ASW work.. I have multiple carrier TF set to reaction zero following the lead carrier TF, also set to reaction zero. This helps my carrier TF stay together and don't go charging off after the enemy carrier TFs, depending on the aggression rating of the TF Cdr. It works well the majority of the time but is not fool-proof. CVEs will be assigned to escort amphibious TF providing them with close CAP and ASW support.

Alfred clarified that the react setting you make on the TF screen is not the one used by the AI when it does a carrier reaction calculation. The react you can set yourself is for patrolling SCTFs, ASW TFs, etc. Carrier reactions are a special case that looks (I think) at TF commander aggression, relative strength of the two sides, sorties/fuel remaining, and similar considerations. Plus the usual random die roll of course.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Bif1961)
Post #: 187
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/11/2019 2:06:34 PM   
Bif1961


Posts: 1584
Joined: 6/26/2008
From: Phenix City, Alabama
Status: offline
Maybe that is why Halsey finds himself in charge of something other than carriers in my Allied navies. He has led some wild charges in the past and I understand the other variables, like need to fuel ships in on TF and operational points in another have their affects as well. It is a witches brew of things we can't control that can affect the response of carrier TFs and now you tell me I have even less control over my digital forces than I imagined.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 188
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/15/2019 5:25:06 PM   
Cheesesteak


Posts: 115
Joined: 11/8/2010
From: Richmond, VA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bif1961

Maybe that is why Halsey finds himself in charge of something other than carriers in my Allied navies. He has led some wild charges in the past and I understand the other variables, like need to fuel ships in on TF and operational points in another have their affects as well. It is a witches brew of things we can't control that can affect the response of carrier TFs and now you tell me I have even less control over my digital forces than I imagined.


witches brews are rarely good for the health.

on the other hand, i found this to be exceptionally delicious






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

"Knowledge is Good" - Emil Faber

(in reply to Bif1961)
Post #: 189
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/15/2019 5:29:39 PM   
Cheesesteak


Posts: 115
Joined: 11/8/2010
From: Richmond, VA
Status: offline
Our CVs are organized and prepared to (counter)strike one of two major targets. Tentatively naming the plan of action: 'Operation HMB'

Upon returning stateside, I texted Fins for an in-game update to add to the emails we've exchanged. Apparently something upsetting happened in NASCAR that annoyed/upset him to the point of putting off WITP. Hopefully he didn't follow through on his claim to send our CVs on a suicide run.

_____________________________

"Knowledge is Good" - Emil Faber

(in reply to Cheesesteak)
Post #: 190
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/15/2019 5:40:59 PM   
Cheesesteak


Posts: 115
Joined: 11/8/2010
From: Richmond, VA
Status: offline
RA Fins didn't think this overly noteworthy, but I love reading this kind of combat report. Yay for PT boats:

AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR Feb 19, 42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Moulmein at 55,55, Range 5,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
SC Ch 25
SC Ch 26
xAK Kamogawa Maru
xAK Sinko Maru
xAK Seia Maru
xAK Tamagawa Maru
xAK Tatuwa Maru
xAK Toa Maru
xAK Yamabiko Maru
xAK Yamakaze Maru, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
xAK Yamazato Maru
xAK Yamagiri Maru
xAK Yamazuki Maru
xAK Yodogawa Maru
xAK Onoe Maru
xAK Hitati Maru
xAK Kosin Maru
xAK Nichiyu Maru
xAK Nitti Maru
xAK Nitiran Maru
xAK Nozima Maru
xAK Nitisan Maru
xAK Kozui Maru

Allied Ships
MTB 9, Shell hits 2
MTB 10, Shell hits 1, on fire

< Message edited by Cheesesteak -- 10/15/2019 5:47:12 PM >


_____________________________

"Knowledge is Good" - Emil Faber

(in reply to Cheesesteak)
Post #: 191
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/15/2019 5:41:36 PM   
Cheesesteak


Posts: 115
Joined: 11/8/2010
From: Richmond, VA
Status: offline
Night Time Surface Combat, near Moulmein at 55,55, Range 2,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
SC Ch 4
SC Ch 5
SC Ch 6
SC Ch 10
SC Ch 11
SC Ch 12
AK Sakito Maru
xAK Azumasan Maru
xAK Yamasimo Maru
xAK Canberra Maru, Torpedo hits 1, heavy fires
xAK Brisbane Maru
xAK Melbourne Maru
xAK Hawaii Maru
xAK Manila Maru
xAK Arizona Maru
xAK Seattle Maru
xAK Azuma Maru
xAK Kinugasa Maru
xAK Kagu Maru
xAK Kinai Maru
xAK Katuragi Maru
xAK Kirishima Maru
xAK Hakkai Maru
xAK Hokuroku Maru
xAK Tokyo Maru
xAK Arimasan Maru
xAP Hie Maru
xAP Terukuni Maru
xAP Husimi Maru
xAP Buenos Aires Maru
xAP Huzi Maru
xAP Kokuryu Maru
xAP Mizuho Maru
xAP Kamo Maru
xAP Ural Maru
xAP Baikal Maru
xAP Kasado Maru
xAP Kowa Maru
xAP Palau Maru

Allied Ships
MTB 9

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

Allied Ships Reported to be Approaching!
Japanese TF suspends unloading operations and begins to get underway

_____________________________

"Knowledge is Good" - Emil Faber

(in reply to Cheesesteak)
Post #: 192
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/15/2019 5:42:08 PM   
Cheesesteak


Posts: 115
Joined: 11/8/2010
From: Richmond, VA
Status: offline
Wenchow gets paid a visit by some big boys:

Night Naval bombardment of Wenchow at 89,58

Japanese Ships
BB Mutsu
BB Nagato
CL Yubari
CL Oi
CL Kitakami

Allied ground losses:
266 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 16 destroyed, 21 disabled
Engineers: 4 destroyed, 1 disabled

Heavy Industry hits 1
Manpower hits 2
Fires 244
Airbase hits 5
Airbase supply hits 4
Runway hits 11
Port hits 4
Port fuel hits 2

E7K2 Alf acting as spotter for BB Mutsu
BB Mutsu firing at Wenchow
BB Nagato firing at Wenchow
CL Yubari firing at 70th Chinese Corps
CL Oi firing at Wenchow
CL Kitakami firing at 86th Chinese Corps

_____________________________

"Knowledge is Good" - Emil Faber

(in reply to Cheesesteak)
Post #: 193
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/15/2019 5:42:47 PM   
Cheesesteak


Posts: 115
Joined: 11/8/2010
From: Richmond, VA
Status: offline
invasions and a lucky strike

Amphibious Assault at Morotai (80,101)

TF 77 troops unloading over beach at Morotai, 80,101



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amphibious Assault at Gorontalo (72,99)

TF 85 troops unloading over beach at Gorontalo, 72,99



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amphibious Assault at Lomblen (68,113)

TF 117 troops unloading over beach at Lomblen, 68,113



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack near Phuket at 47,69

Japanese Ships
DD Mikazuki, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
DD Minazuki
DD Satsuki
DD Uzuki
DD Yayoi

Allied Ships
SS Truant

Japanese ground losses:
Vehicles lost 2 (1 destroyed, 1 disabled)

SS Truant launches 6 torpedoes at DD Mikazuki

_____________________________

"Knowledge is Good" - Emil Faber

(in reply to Cheesesteak)
Post #: 194
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/15/2019 5:43:42 PM   
Cheesesteak


Posts: 115
Joined: 11/8/2010
From: Richmond, VA
Status: offline
while his sub activity remains focused on major ports:

Sub attack near Auckland at 117,184

Japanese Ships
SS I-3

Allied Ships
AM Moa
AM Muritai

SS I-3 launches 2 torpedoes at AM Moa


I should add he's notched an impressive tally of allied CAs sunk by subs. annoying and effective.

_____________________________

"Knowledge is Good" - Emil Faber

(in reply to Cheesesteak)
Post #: 195
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/15/2019 5:44:20 PM   
Cheesesteak


Posts: 115
Joined: 11/8/2010
From: Richmond, VA
Status: offline
have given up the air over rangoon for now:

Morning Air attack on Rangoon , at 54,53

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid spotted at 18 NM, estimated altitude 26,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 5 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 30

No Japanese losses

Aircraft Attacking:
30 x A6M2 Zero sweeping at 20000 feet

_____________________________

"Knowledge is Good" - Emil Faber

(in reply to Cheesesteak)
Post #: 196
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/15/2019 5:45:11 PM   
Cheesesteak


Posts: 115
Joined: 11/8/2010
From: Richmond, VA
Status: offline
he's put a naval guard unit at lord howe:

Morning Air attack on 34th JNAF AF Unit , at 128,177 (Raoul Island)

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid spotted at 35 NM, estimated altitude 11,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 10 minutes

Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 5

Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress: 1 damaged

Aircraft Attacking:
5 x B-17E Fortress bombing from 6000 feet *
Ground Attack: 4 x 500 lb GP Bomb



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Lord Howe Island , at 100,169

Weather in hex: Light cloud

Raid spotted at 27 NM, estimated altitude 10,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 7 minutes

Allied aircraft
B-17D Fortress x 11

Allied aircraft losses
B-17D Fortress: 1 damaged

Japanese ground losses:
40 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled

Port hits 5

Aircraft Attacking:
8 x B-17D Fortress bombing from 6000 feet
Port Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb
3 x B-17D Fortress bombing from 6000 feet
Ground Attack: 8 x 500 lb GP Bomb

Also attacking 91st Naval Guard Unit ...
Also attacking Lord Howe Island ...


_____________________________

"Knowledge is Good" - Emil Faber

(in reply to Cheesesteak)
Post #: 197
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/16/2019 11:08:26 PM   
aaffins

 

Posts: 84
Joined: 3/7/2010
From: Richmond, VA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bif1961

I limit my fleet CVs to no more than 2 per TF until 1944, though when I get my light carriers I will include 1 or 2 in a TF with 2 CVs, I use the CVLs for 100% CAP setting and their TB or DBs for ASW work.. I have multiple carrier TF set to reaction zero following the lead carrier TF, also set to reaction zero. This helps my carrier TF stay together and don't go charging off after the enemy carrier TFs, depending on the aggression rating of the TF Cdr. It works well the majority of the time but is not fool-proof. CVEs will be assigned to escort amphibious TF providing them with close CAP and ASW support.

Alfred clarified that the react setting you make on the TF screen is not the one used by the AI when it does a carrier reaction calculation. The react you can set yourself is for patrolling SCTFs, ASW TFs, etc. Carrier reactions are a special case that looks (I think) at TF commander aggression, relative strength of the two sides, sorties/fuel remaining, and similar considerations. Plus the usual random die roll of course.


Apologies for the delayed response. Thank you guys for the information, very helpful. I suspect my previous misadventures were simply bad luck, as I was using essentially the settings described, but it was February of '42.(VAC: This is a partial explanation for that dumpster fire of a Ceylon op)

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 198
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/16/2019 11:46:57 PM   
aaffins

 

Posts: 84
Joined: 3/7/2010
From: Richmond, VA
Status: offline
Here is a slightly more orderly update, dear readers. At last check on 2/8/42 a sizable carrier force had hit Adak and we were curious as to what that meant. Here's how things played out:

2/9/42 - We discovered the raid was a precursor to a fairly significant NoPac invasion. He captured Adak, Attu and Amchitka. Adak merited the full 7th Inf Div. We are fairly certain the carrier air was Kaga plus CVLs.

The NZ Navy bombarded Suva, but did minimal damage. Subsequent ground attack reduced our forts to 0, but we held with 1:1 odds and the enemy now receiving a fatigue negative modifier.

2/10/42 - CL Trenton was sunk by enemy subs attempting to interdict enemy shipping near Fiji.

Adak fell, we lost the following units:
151st Combat Engineer Regiment
154th FA Bn
42nd Construction Regiment
B Det USN Port Svc

Suva odds improved to 1:2 with the IJN marines exhausted.

Enemy nearly overwhelmed Nanning, we rush reinforcements there. Not a good base to lose to a relatively small IJA contingent, especially without a lot to prevent a flanking maneuver on Changsha.

2/11/42 - The KB reappears north of Fiji. Meanwhile, the USN CVs see their first action of the war, with Yorktown hitting Raoul Island with a large raid. Purpose of this was to try to keep the KB interested in SoPac while we moved the fleet to Western Australia. Appeared to at least concern him based on his post turn email.

An assault on Horn I. by 3 SNLFs was repulsed.

2/12/42 - Bandoeng fell after a multi week siege. Pegu was also taken out by two the divisions advancing from Moulmein. Horn I. fell as well. At least Nanning is still holding on by its fingernails.

2/13/42 - KB hammers Suva, but no ground attack follows. We have gotten some supplies in, there is a brief ray of hope.

2/14/42 - Well that was foolish. Day 2 of 160+ KB planes a a shock attack is too much, Suva falls.

2/15/42 - Nothing of real note, he spent some time cleaning up PI bases. Landed at Derby but only a JNAF Co. which was insufficient to capture the base.

2/16/42 - Landing at Darwin, we had anticipated this as we'd been getting a ton of SigInt reports about two divisions moving to Perth. We thought such an aggressive move was unlikely so figured they would probably hit Darwin. As a result, base was evacuated. Invasion is escorted by 4x BBs, 4X CAs and a CVE.

2/17/42 - The USN CVs (Lex/E/Sara) are now off NW Oz, an IJN sub attacks the TF but only sees a CA.

With Nanning reinforced he appears to be pulling troops back. Considering he was using unrestricted troops to make this advance this is not shocking, surely they could be better used elsewhere.

2/18/42 - BBs Colorado, Mississippi and Warspite bombard Suva. Moderate risk, but since he had not brought up AV support with his attacks I figured we could get in there fairly safely. Hopefully delays his buildup by a few days.

2/19/42 - The above referenced PT mischief, always fun. He's reducing our Malaya survivors at Temuloh. Won't take long, no supplies.

2/20/42 - He has another go at Nanning, but our reinforcements are up, he gets 1:2 and takes heavy losses.

2/21/42 - An IJN sub runs into the USN CV TF again. Still no detection of CVs showing on the combat report, but I think he suspects. The enemy TFs from the Darwin op had been refueling/rearming and Koepang and they're all running to the east.

KB pops up 10 hexes ENE of Brisbane. Our Oz P-40s may have their day. There's not a lot for him to get there, but the CA Canberra is in yard from a sub attack last month. Sydney is evacuated although it was somewhat empty too.

He launches a first attack at Rangoon and is repulsed with 1:3 odds and his engineers take heavy casualties knocking our forts down to two. We're moving out anyway as he has two more division landing at Moulmein.

(in reply to aaffins)
Post #: 199
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/17/2019 1:25:51 AM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 13114
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
Multiple sub contacts with a TF are one of the reasons to change a CVTF's escorts each time it makes port. Many players have ID'd their opponents CV TFs by having one sighting that included the CVs and all the escorts, and then later detecting a few of the same escorts in a TF and concluding that the CVs are likely there too.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to aaffins)
Post #: 200
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/17/2019 4:47:19 PM   
Cheesesteak


Posts: 115
Joined: 11/8/2010
From: Richmond, VA
Status: offline
Question for people who have done AARs - how did you get over the mental hurdle of sharing valuable intel on the forum?? We're getting into the part of the game where it starts presenting unique circumstances worth fully explaining.


_____________________________

"Knowledge is Good" - Emil Faber

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 201
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/17/2019 6:57:22 PM   
Gridley380


Posts: 464
Joined: 12/20/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cheesesteak

Question for people who have done AARs - how did you get over the mental hurdle of sharing valuable intel on the forum?? We're getting into the part of the game where it starts presenting unique circumstances worth fully explaining.



I've seen players have a lag between the game and the AAR - so the AAR is on January 10th and the game is at January 20th, say. But in a big enough buffer and you're unlikely to give away anything major.

(in reply to Cheesesteak)
Post #: 202
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/17/2019 7:16:16 PM   
Cheesesteak


Posts: 115
Joined: 11/8/2010
From: Richmond, VA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gridley380


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cheesesteak

Question for people who have done AARs - how did you get over the mental hurdle of sharing valuable intel on the forum?? We're getting into the part of the game where it starts presenting unique circumstances worth fully explaining.



I've seen players have a lag between the game and the AAR - so the AAR is on January 10th and the game is at January 20th, say. But in a big enough buffer and you're unlikely to give away anything major.


Thanks Gridley.

Your Amazon package of: "Interesting AAR Updates" and "Potentially Moronic Ideas" is expected to arrive in 5-10 turn days.

_____________________________

"Knowledge is Good" - Emil Faber

(in reply to Gridley380)
Post #: 203
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/17/2019 11:12:53 PM   
aaffins

 

Posts: 84
Joined: 3/7/2010
From: Richmond, VA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Cheesesteak


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gridley380


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cheesesteak

Question for people who have done AARs - how did you get over the mental hurdle of sharing valuable intel on the forum?? We're getting into the part of the game where it starts presenting unique circumstances worth fully explaining.



I've seen players have a lag between the game and the AAR - so the AAR is on January 10th and the game is at January 20th, say. But in a big enough buffer and you're unlikely to give away anything major.


Thanks Gridley.

Your Amazon package of: "Interesting AAR Updates" and "Potentially Moronic Ideas" is expected to arrive in 5-10 turn days.


We have deprived our dear readers of "excitement" far too long, can't be cutting them off now! I, for one, have complete and utter trust in the integrity of WITP forumites.

2/22/42:

Here come the big boys for Brisbane, our ABDA P-40s rise in defense:

Afternoon Air attack on Brisbane , at 96,160

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid spotted at 35 NM, estimated altitude 15,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 13 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 41
B5N2 Kate x 17
D3A1 Val x 63

Allied aircraft
P-40E Warhawk x 85

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 4 destroyed
B5N2 Kate: 5 destroyed
D3A1 Val: 11 destroyed, 11 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
P-40E Warhawk: 7 destroyed

Not so bad, methinks, should sting at least a little.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by aaffins -- 10/18/2019 3:02:36 AM >

(in reply to Cheesesteak)
Post #: 204
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/18/2019 2:59:12 AM   
CaptBeefheart


Posts: 1796
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline
There are pros and cons to doing a lag in your AAR. If you do a lag, then you won't get real-time advice from astute gentlemen such as myself.

I don't comment on anything except game mechanics if I'm reading both AARs. I would hope others would be the same. In your case, I'm not reading the esteemed admiral's AAR so there's no chance of an opsec breach.

Cheers,
CB

_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to aaffins)
Post #: 205
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/18/2019 3:07:49 PM   
Cheesesteak


Posts: 115
Joined: 11/8/2010
From: Richmond, VA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CaptBeefheart

There are pros and cons to doing a lag in your AAR. If you do a lag, then you won't get real-time advice from astute gentlemen such as myself.

I don't comment on anything except game mechanics if I'm reading both AARs. I would hope others would be the same. In your case, I'm not reading the esteemed admiral's AAR so there's no chance of an opsec breach.

Cheers,
CB


good point! in that case, we will solicit advice. What on earth to do now?! Pulling directly from our 4-person mini-war council email thread:

FAF:
Not a great turn. Our RN CLs which had been ordered to retreat I guess
didn't get going fast enough got ripped by some IJN CAs. I think two
got Long Lanced, all four are sunk without doing much in return. Old
ships, so not huge losses, but losing cruisers is never a good thing.

KB is pulling back as anticipated.

Large CV force detected 12 hexes NW of Canton I. in the Central
Pacific...raid, move on one of our CentPac bases? Guess would be this
is the Kaga and friends group coming down from the Aleutians, timing
is about right with a fuel stop at Truk or from AOs around Wake.

USN CVBG is detected two hexes NE of Port Hedland, Aus. We are 19
hexes from Darwin, so we can get to the edge of strike range next
turn. There is a large TF unloading there. It's probably a fair
assumption they were unloading, so it would difficult for them to get
moving quickly. However that would leave us 7 hexes from Koepang,
where he has an air HQ. Tempted as I am, I don't think operating
within range of torpedo planes and zeroes is wise at this point in the
war. We're risking a massive setback for a relatively limited prize -
some nice transports and maybe parts of support units.


_____________________________

"Knowledge is Good" - Emil Faber

(in reply to CaptBeefheart)
Post #: 206
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/18/2019 3:16:02 PM   
Cheesesteak


Posts: 115
Joined: 11/8/2010
From: Richmond, VA
Status: offline
My thought is that Darwin no longer comes out in the green on a CBA. He has enough lead time to take swipes at us, and we would just barely be hitting whatever is still there.

I've not loaded the turn, so will be looking to Fins to update on weather conditions. I believe they are clear-partly cloudy in the area.

What do you gentlemen think?

1) Go in full steam
2) Turn tail
3) Move just out of Zero range and hope he sends his Bettys on a suicide run
4) ?

I like 3, because we likely caught him with his pants down in the area. If we retain a presence in this (relatively) vulnerable area, my hope it that he would, by necessity, divert from his current plan. Really isn't much of an operational success, but gotta try to at least make lemonade out of this. Does anyone have better recommendations? I'll be able to provide screenshots around 5pm EST if that helps.





_____________________________

"Knowledge is Good" - Emil Faber

(in reply to Cheesesteak)
Post #: 207
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/18/2019 10:31:38 PM   
aaffins

 

Posts: 84
Joined: 3/7/2010
From: Richmond, VA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cheesesteak

My thought is that Darwin no longer comes out in the green on a CBA. He has enough lead time to take swipes at us, and we would just barely be hitting whatever is still there.

I've not loaded the turn, so will be looking to Fins to update on weather conditions. I believe they are clear-partly cloudy in the area.

What do you gentlemen think?

1) Go in full steam
2) Turn tail
3) Move just out of Zero range and hope he sends his Bettys on a suicide run
4) ?

I like 3, because we likely caught him with his pants down in the area. If we retain a presence in this (relatively) vulnerable area, my hope it that he would, by necessity, divert from his current plan. Really isn't much of an operational success, but gotta try to at least make lemonade out of this. Does anyone have better recommendations? I'll be able to provide screenshots around 5pm EST if that helps.






Light rain, forecast partly cloudy

(in reply to Cheesesteak)
Post #: 208
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/18/2019 10:53:40 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 13114
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cheesesteak

My thought is that Darwin no longer comes out in the green on a CBA. He has enough lead time to take swipes at us, and we would just barely be hitting whatever is still there.

I've not loaded the turn, so will be looking to Fins to update on weather conditions. I believe they are clear-partly cloudy in the area.

What do you gentlemen think?

1) Go in full steam
2) Turn tail
3) Move just out of Zero range and hope he sends his Bettys on a suicide run
4) ?

I like 3, because we likely caught him with his pants down in the area. If we retain a presence in this (relatively) vulnerable area, my hope it that he would, by necessity, divert from his current plan. Really isn't much of an operational success, but gotta try to at least make lemonade out of this. Does anyone have better recommendations? I'll be able to provide screenshots around 5pm EST if that helps.


Option 3 sounds good, anything to make him lose those highly experienced Nettie pilots at sea. It will not work if he restricts their range to the 14 hexes of a Zeke with drop tanks, but chances are he has them set for full torpedo carrying range because carriers are a juicy target. So move to 15-16 hexes of Ambon and have good Nav Search/Nav Attack set in case he sends some SCTFs your way.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Cheesesteak)
Post #: 209
RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesest... - 10/20/2019 5:25:59 PM   
aaffins

 

Posts: 84
Joined: 3/7/2010
From: Richmond, VA
Status: offline
The turn VAC posted my thoughts on above was 2/23

On 2/24 we did pick 'Option 3' as suggested, but the Netties from Koepang stayed home. The opponent had landed an SNLF Co. at Derby from 2 APDs, which a small Dutch SCTF we had in the area sank as they tried to retreat. Our CVs flew a strike mission against it and basically destroyed - 522 casualties. The ensuing attack against our base force got 1:99 odds.

The DD Thanet was damaged in the first week of the war and has been repairing for the last several months at Cebu. Although not fully repaired she was good enough to fight so we attacked a small TF landing troops to mop up bases in the central PI, sinking 3 PBs.

Enemy captured Toungoo with Paras, unfortunately our RAF Hurricane Recce unit was flying out of there so we've lost it. Buying back of course but that leaves us without recon in that theater.

Temuloh fell, ending Allied resistance in Malaysia.

The KB and presumed mini-KB seen in the Central Pacific a few days ago both disappeared.

2/25 - Large enemy force arrived at Singyang to try to reopen the railroad link between Hankow and the north. We've got nearly 1,600 AV there...keeping that LOC closed is valuable and it's a wooded hex so good defensive terrain. He suffers over 5,000 casualties (432 squads disabled/destroyed). He'll undoubtedly reinforce, so we're pushing some units forward from Nanyang to cut off his supply line from Chengchow/Loyang and possibly even threaten those bases if he's lightly garrisoned with Chinese puppet units.

He captured Prome by airdrop, which does cut us off at Rangoon. More problematically the BFF Brigade was there in Strat mode and got hammered. Our main units are pulling out of Rangoon already.

2/26 - Thanet hits another convoy, sinking 3 more PBs and damaging some other shipping.

Our CVs are moving back towards Perth, hammering the subs he has off NW Oz. We want him to see us heading that way as the plan is to now divert West, link up with Yorktown (just arrived at Perth) and then circle back to hit Palembang. Hope to catch a tanker convoy there and ideally damage the oil refinery.

CL Raleigh was badly damaged by a sub off NZ.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 210
Page:   <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Always with them negative waves... Aaffins/Cheesesteak v. RADM Yamaguchi Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   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

0.170