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: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!)

 
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: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) Page: <<   < prev  11 12 13 [14] 15   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 4/7/2021 8:17:37 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3112
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline
Taberfane is actually clear terrain IIRC.

(in reply to rader)
Post #: 391
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 4/7/2021 8:35:47 PM   
rader


Posts: 1170
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Taberfane is actually clear terrain IIRC.


Wow, you're right! I had no idea and probably wouldn't have built there if I'd known, but looks like it's clear but has the wrong graphic texture. Just like Waigeo up there. I'm guessing this is a hex info assignment error rather than a map error but who knows. Wow. That sucks a bit but also makes me feel a bit better about the combat result.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 392
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 4/13/2021 8:46:51 AM   
rader


Posts: 1170
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
August 12, 1943

Heavy air battles, mostly in Burma, result in high losses today.

With one Japanese advance toward Allied troops blocked, several other divisions shock attacked across the river into the Allied column. I was a bit worried about this but it worked out well, dealing heavy losses to the Allied formations and forcing them to retreat to the safety of the jungle.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by rader -- 4/13/2021 8:47:06 AM >

(in reply to rader)
Post #: 393
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 4/13/2021 3:56:53 PM   
rader


Posts: 1170
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
August 13, 1943.

A follow-up landing at Timoeka. A day after the landing, some Vals got through to hit an APA and AKA without much trouble and Japanese forces managed to hold the base against an Allied shock attack. Likely this will lead to more escalation, but the KB has finally arrived in the area to intervene. Looks like it was spotted by Allied search planes so it will be interesting to see if he sticks around for a carrier fight or takes this opportunity to withdraw his valuable ships.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by rader -- 4/15/2021 5:03:25 AM >

(in reply to rader)
Post #: 394
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 4/15/2021 5:03:00 AM   
rader


Posts: 1170
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
August 15, 1943

Heavy action in the air every day now as Allied bombers come in to hit airbases around the Arafura sea, and also in Burma around Magwe as the Japanese army retreats to safety. We've lost around three hundred planes over the last four days. Allied losses have also been significant, but a lot less heavy than Japanese ones. On the other hand, most Japanese fighters have been shot down over friendly territory so pilot losses aren't all that bad (around 20 KIA per day, with around as many wounded). Hopefully some of those wounded pilots will eventually come back.

The KB is lurking just to the North of the Arafura, but he's being cautious and hanging back, protecting Taberfane with fighters and surface warships. Will this be a titanic clash, or more of a fizzle? Time will tell.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by rader -- 4/15/2021 4:04:51 PM >

(in reply to rader)
Post #: 395
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 4/15/2021 10:14:06 PM   
rader


Posts: 1170
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
It really does seem like night bombing (or more precisely, night interception) is borked. I decided to throw a bunch of expert George pilots to interdict the Allied might raids in Burma. This was the result




Attachment (1)

(in reply to rader)
Post #: 396
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 4/16/2021 10:25:42 PM   
rader


Posts: 1170
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
No turn today because my opponent got drunk at the pub. Priorities

(in reply to rader)
Post #: 397
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 4/17/2021 11:00:25 PM   
rader


Posts: 1170
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
Question: if there are say 50 Allied PT boats defending a base (say 10 TFs of 5 each), are they likely to pose a serious risk to Battleships coming in to bombard?

(in reply to rader)
Post #: 398
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 4/17/2021 11:32:56 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 16942
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rader

Question: if there are say 50 Allied PT boats defending a base (say 10 TFs of 5 each), are they likely to pose a serious risk to Battleships coming in to bombard?

Risk of being torpedoed - not likely. Risk of using up all ammo and most ops points - likely.

_____________________________

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 rader)
Post #: 399
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 4/17/2021 11:43:10 PM   
rader


Posts: 1170
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: rader

Question: if there are say 50 Allied PT boats defending a base (say 10 TFs of 5 each), are they likely to pose a serious risk to Battleships coming in to bombard?

Risk of being torpedoed - not likely. Risk of using up all ammo and most ops points - likely.


So what's the best way to handle the situation if the base is heavily defended by fighters? Does that make it impregnable?

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 400
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 4/18/2021 7:16:03 AM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 16942
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rader


quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: rader

Question: if there are say 50 Allied PT boats defending a base (say 10 TFs of 5 each), are they likely to pose a serious risk to Battleships coming in to bombard?

Risk of being torpedoed - not likely. Risk of using up all ammo and most ops points - likely.


So what's the best way to handle the situation if the base is heavily defended by fighters? Does that make it impregnable?

Send in TFs of 2 DDs each to deal with the PTs before your bombardment TF arrives. Use lower TF numbers for DDs.

_____________________________

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 rader)
Post #: 401
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 4/20/2021 5:56:40 AM   
rader


Posts: 1170
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
August 20, 1943.

The battle of Taberfane.

A very eventful and somewhat surprising turn. A lot happened, so I'll try to break it down but basically I think of this so far as being similar to Gudalcanal. Here's the situation on Taberfane. Allied forces landed on the island around 2 weeks ago and Japanese reinforcements have started to arrive. Today, we decided to send in some battleships to bombard the airfield. The Kido Butai is hovering for opportunities but don't want to waste our valuable flyers against land-based fighters.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 402
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 4/20/2021 6:16:16 AM   
rader


Posts: 1170
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
Here's what happened. At Taberfane, he had multiple task forces of PT boats (I hadn't seen any other ships there but maybe they were new arrivals). I decided to try to clear out some of the PT boats with a few individual destroyers before the battleships went in, but the destroyers ran into big guys and pretty much all got slaughtered to no effect.

So here's what happened:

Night Time Surface Combat, near Taberfane at 82,117, Range 7,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
DD Yugiri, Shell hits 4, heavy fires

Allied Ships
BB Indiana
BB Massachusetts
CL Montpelier
CL Denver
DD Abbot, Shell hits 1
DD Anthony
DD Aulick
DD MacDonough, Shell hits 1, on fire, heavy damage

there were a few more like this, such as:

Night Time Surface Combat, near Taberfane at 82,117, Range 7,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
DD Okikaze, Shell hits 1

Allied Ships
CL Phoenix
CL Boise
CL Honolulu
DD Charles Ausburne
DD Beale
DD Bennett
DD Boyd
DD Braine

and

Night Time Surface Combat, near Taberfane at 82,117, Range 7,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
DD Yakaze, Shell hits 1

Allied Ships
BB Indiana, Shell hits 1
BB Massachusetts
CL Montpelier
CL Denver
DD Abbot, on fire
DD Anthony

then I was hoping Yamato's group would go in next, but Fuso and Yamashiro arrived first. The old battlewagons fought a fierce knife fight at 2,000 yards with the Allied cruisers, hitting them repeatedly with 36 cm shells:

Night Time Surface Combat, near Taberfane at 82,117, Range 8,000 Yards

Allied aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft losses
SOC-1 Seagull: 5 destroyed

Japanese Ships
BB Fuso, Shell hits 1
BB Yamashiro, Shell hits 13
CA Tone
CA Mikuma, Shell hits 3
CA Suzuya, Shell hits 1
DD Takanami
DD Naganami
DD Tanikaze
DD Michishio, Shell hits 1
DD Arashio
DD Kasumi, Shell hits 1, on fire
DD Amagiri
DD Kisaragi
DD Yayoi
DD Uzuki
DD Satsuki
DD Fumizuki
DD Kikuzuki
DD Mikazuki, Shell hits 1

Allied Ships
CL Phoenix, Shell hits 11, and is sunk
CL Boise, Shell hits 10, and is sunk
CL Honolulu, Shell hits 38, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Charles Ausburne, Shell hits 1
DD Beale, Shell hits 3
DD Bennett, Shell hits 3, on fire
DD Boyd
DD Braine

then something really surprising happened. Not only did the rest of the Allied task forces (even the battleship task force) intentionally avoid Yamato's group, but even the PT boats did. That's weird. Isn't the purpose of PT boats to bravely attack the enemy, even if massively outgunned? I didn't even know this could happen. Group after group of PT boats simply chose not to fight, like this:

Night Time Surface Combat, near Taberfane at 82,117, Range 12,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
BB Kongo
BB Hiei
BB Kirishima
BB Yamato
CA Takao
CA Atago
CA Maya
CA Chokai
CA Myoko
CA Nachi
CA Ashigara
CLAA Tatsuta
DD Shimakaze
DD Kazegumo
DD Makigumo
DD Tamanami
DD Kiyonami
DD Yukikaze
DD Hayashio
DD Isokaze
DD Shiranui
DD Hagikaze
DD Yamakaze
DD Hatsushima
DD Takakaze

Allied Ships
PT-63
PT-155
PT-373
PT-374
PT-375
PT-376
PT-377

Japanese Ships Reported to be Approaching!
Allied TF begins to get underway
Improved night sighting under 78% moonlight
Maximum visibility in Overcast Conditions and 78% moonlight: 8,000 yards
Range closes to 11,000 yards...
CONTACT: Allies radar detects Japanese task force at 11,000 yards
Range closes to 10,000 yards...
Range closes to 9,000 yards...
CONTACT: Allies radar detects Japanese task force at 9,000 yards
Allied TF attempts to evade combat
Range increases to 12,000 yards...
Allied PT Boat TF evades combat

There must have been a dozen Allied TFs at Taberfane (mostly PTs) that turned and ran from Yamato's group. This allowed both battleship groups to waltz in and plaster the airfield:

Night Naval bombardment of Taberfane at 82,117

Allied aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft losses
Hurricane XIIb: 25 damaged
Hurricane XIIb: 6 destroyed on ground
P-47D2 Thunderbolt: 64 damaged
P-47D2 Thunderbolt: 9 destroyed on ground
Kittyhawk IV: 12 damaged
Kittyhawk IV: 3 destroyed on ground
F4U-1 Corsair: 60 damaged
F4U-1 Corsair: 6 destroyed on ground
F4F-4 Wildcat: 64 damaged
F4F-4 Wildcat: 12 destroyed on ground
P-40K Warhawk: 58 damaged
P-40K Warhawk: 12 destroyed on ground
PBY-5 Catalina: 11 damaged
PBY-5 Catalina: 3 destroyed on ground
Spitfire Vc Trop: 6 damaged
Spitfire Vc Trop: 3 destroyed on ground

Japanese Ships
BB Yamashiro
BB Fuso
CA Suzuya
CA Mikuma
CA Tone
DD Mikazuki
DD Kikuzuki
DD Fumizuki
DD Satsuki
DD Uzuki
DD Yayoi
DD Kisaragi
DD Amagiri
DD Arashio
DD Michishio
DD Tanikaze
DD Naganami
DD Takanami

Allied ground losses:
150 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 3 disabled
Non Combat: 17 destroyed, 54 disabled
Engineers: 3 destroyed, 7 disabled
Guns lost 13 (1 destroyed, 12 disabled)
Vehicles lost 17 (6 destroyed, 11 disabled)

Airbase hits 38
Airbase supply hits 9
Runway hits 66
Port hits 45
Port supply hits 7

and

Night Naval bombardment of Taberfane at 82,117 - Coastal Guns Fire Back!

Allied aircraft
no flights

Allied aircraft losses
P-40K Warhawk: 17 damaged
P-40K Warhawk: 8 destroyed on ground
P-47D2 Thunderbolt: 29 damaged
P-47D2 Thunderbolt: 4 destroyed on ground
F4F-4 Wildcat: 38 damaged
F4F-4 Wildcat: 6 destroyed on ground
Hurricane XIIb: 15 damaged
Hurricane XIIb: 3 destroyed on ground
F4U-1 Corsair: 33 damaged
F4U-1 Corsair: 5 destroyed on ground
Kittyhawk IV: 5 damaged
Kittyhawk IV: 1 destroyed on ground
PBY-5 Catalina: 6 damaged
Spitfire Vc Trop: 2 damaged
Spitfire Vc Trop: 2 destroyed on ground

1 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.

Japanese Ships
BB Yamato
BB Kirishima
BB Hiei
BB Kongo
CA Ashigara
CA Nachi
CA Myoko
CA Chokai
CA Maya
CA Atago
CA Takao
CLAA Tatsuta
DD Takakaze
DD Hatsushima
DD Yamakaze
DD Hagikaze
DD Shiranui
DD Isokaze
DD Hayashio
DD Yukikaze
DD Kiyonami
DD Tamanami
DD Makigumo
DD Kazegumo
DD Shimakaze

Allied ground losses:
493 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 6 disabled
Non Combat: 15 destroyed, 20 disabled
Engineers: 3 destroyed, 4 disabled
Guns lost 24 (1 destroyed, 23 disabled)
Vehicles lost 13 (2 destroyed, 11 disabled)

Airbase hits 13
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 19
Port hits 12
Port supply hits 9

I actually would have expected more casualties but can't complain about the aircraft destroyed. Nice to see the Allied lose some planes on the ground for a change. But then in the morning, all my individual destroyers were hunted down. Turns out I'd somehow sent them in without adequate fuel to make it home...

Day Time Surface Combat, near Taberfane at 81,117, Range 19,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
DD Yugiri, Shell hits 9, and is sunk

Allied Ships
BB Indiana
BB Massachusetts
CL Montpelier
CL Denver
DD Abbot
DD Anthony


(in reply to rader)
Post #: 403
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 4/20/2021 6:19:53 AM   
rader


Posts: 1170
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
The best part for Japan here probably the three nice cruisers sunk by Fuso and Yamashiro (each took 5-10 x 36cm shells before going down).

But Japan also lost several destroyers, which hurts a lot.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to rader)
Post #: 404
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 4/20/2021 6:22:48 AM   
rader


Posts: 1170
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
And the aircraft losses tally today showed a lot more Allied than Japanese losses for the first time in a while.





Attachment (1)

(in reply to rader)
Post #: 405
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 4/20/2021 10:55:07 PM   
rader


Posts: 1170
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
August 21, 1943.

With the Taberfane airfield shut down, the Allied carriers pulled back to the south. Japanese bombers come in to compound the damage at Taberfane.

Meanwhile, some Vals caught 5x AKAs unloading and sank most if not all of them, including cargo. I'm guessing the vehicles were probably engineering vehicles (e.g., bulldozers) rather than armor...

In Burma, the Magwe oil is protected by heavy Japanese flak but he's slowly shutting it down, albeit with significant 4E AA losses. Current oil production sits at 162(138). A few more raids and it will be gone.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to rader)
Post #: 406
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 4/24/2021 5:44:23 PM   
rader


Posts: 1170
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
August 25, 1943.

Not much to report. Taberfane is under seige by Japanese forces and the KB and Allied carriers continue to hold back, staring at each other. A fair bit of sub action. A few days ago a sub put 2x torpedoes in the BB Indiana (almost certainly not sunk, despite being listed that way). Today, a US destroyer hit a mine while on a bombardment mission and I almost believe that one did sink. Light to moderate aircraft losses daily.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to rader)
Post #: 407
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 4/26/2021 4:59:06 AM   
rader


Posts: 1170
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
August 27, 1943.

More sparring around Taberfane. Some Georges got a drizzle of light bombing at night but then did great in the air against some sweeping P-38s.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to rader)
Post #: 408
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 5/5/2021 5:46:43 AM   
rader


Posts: 1170
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
September 5, 1943.

The daily sparring around Taberfane at sea and in the air continues, with minor skirmishes every day. Two days ago a major Japanese land-based airstrike on the Allied carrier task force was beaten back with heavy losses. Today, some P-47 sweeps over Timor inflicted more losses on the Japanese, but at enough cost to themselves to render the sweep unprofitable.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to rader)
Post #: 409
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 5/5/2021 5:55:26 AM   
rader


Posts: 1170
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
I found this interesting. There are very few Japanese merchant ships without "maru" in their name. This is one of them.

(Maru, per my understanding means "circle" in Japanese and is associated with luck, so somehow stuck in civilian ship names - hence Kobayashi Maru, which was also an actual WW2 ship.)




Attachment (1)

(in reply to rader)
Post #: 410
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 5/5/2021 4:36:18 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 16942
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rader

I found this interesting. There are very few Japanese merchant ships without "maru" in their name. This is one of them.

(Maru, per my understanding means "circle" in Japanese and is associated with luck, so somehow stuck in civilian ship names - hence Kobayashi Maru, which was also an actual WW2 ship.)




Sunk by 40mm Bofors? It appears that not having the Maru designation was indeed unlucky!

_____________________________

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 rader)
Post #: 411
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 5/5/2021 4:47:40 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 11623
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: rader

I found this interesting. There are very few Japanese merchant ships without "maru" in their name. This is one of them.

(Maru, per my understanding means "circle" in Japanese and is associated with luck, so somehow stuck in civilian ship names - hence Kobayashi Maru, which was also an actual WW2 ship.)




Sunk by 40mm Bofors? It appears that not having the Maru designation was indeed unlucky!


I have seen ships sunk by the 50 caliber MA DEUCE!

I don't recall any .303 sinkings, however.

_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 412
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 5/5/2021 6:04:48 PM   
Dili

 

Posts: 4697
Joined: 9/10/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rader

September 5, 1943.

The daily sparring around Taberfane at sea and in the air continues, with minor skirmishes every day. Two days ago a major Japanese land-based airstrike on the Allied carrier task force was beaten back with heavy losses. Today, some P-47 sweeps over Timor inflicted more losses on the Japanese, but at enough cost to themselves to render the sweep unprofitable.



Why? i am seeing an almost 1:3 favorable to Allies.


< Message edited by Dili -- 5/5/2021 6:05:05 PM >

(in reply to rader)
Post #: 413
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 5/6/2021 7:48:49 PM   
rader


Posts: 1170
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

quote:

ORIGINAL: rader

September 5, 1943.

The daily sparring around Taberfane at sea and in the air continues, with minor skirmishes every day. Two days ago a major Japanese land-based airstrike on the Allied carrier task force was beaten back with heavy losses. Today, some P-47 sweeps over Timor inflicted more losses on the Japanese, but at enough cost to themselves to render the sweep unprofitable.



Why? i am seeing an almost 1:3 favorable to Allies.




1:3 against Jugs seems fairly decent - I'm happy with it at least :)

(in reply to Dili)
Post #: 414
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 5/7/2021 2:03:29 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 9747
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rader


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

quote:

ORIGINAL: rader

September 5, 1943.

The daily sparring around Taberfane at sea and in the air continues, with minor skirmishes every day. Two days ago a major Japanese land-based airstrike on the Allied carrier task force was beaten back with heavy losses. Today, some P-47 sweeps over Timor inflicted more losses on the Japanese, but at enough cost to themselves to render the sweep unprofitable.



Why? i am seeing an almost 1:3 favorable to Allies.




1:3 against Jugs seems fairly decent - I'm happy with it at least :)

I agree. Replace those Tojo with George and see how they team up with the Frank against the Bolts.

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to rader)
Post #: 415
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 5/7/2021 4:20:28 PM   
rader


Posts: 1170
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
Another consideration: the Tojos were basically sacrificial bait at low altitude with semi-untrained pilots. And since the air battle was over Japanese territory, we recovered most of the pilots while the Allied ones became POWs.

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 416
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 5/7/2021 5:39:57 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 9747
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
That too!

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to rader)
Post #: 417
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 5/11/2021 6:25:00 PM   
rader


Posts: 1170
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline
September 13, 1943.

Battles around Taberfane continue. Every few turns he uses the Allied CVs to provide CAP over Taberfane to intercept the daily bombing, which causes heavy losses - especially when the Japanese sweeps refuse to fly (bad weather stopped them this turn I think). At least I know where the carriers are!

Rather bad turn in the air, but we did manage to sink an Allied DD with some dive bombers and 5x LSTs with some Kates.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 418
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 5/11/2021 9:12:41 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 11623
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: offline
If he keeps doing that with his carriers, you know where to put your submarines.

Edited for: Maybe some mines as well.

< Message edited by RangerJoe -- 5/11/2021 9:32:24 PM >


_____________________________

Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing!

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
― Julia Child


(in reply to rader)
Post #: 419
RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) - 5/11/2021 11:25:45 PM   
rader


Posts: 1170
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

If he keeps doing that with his carriers, you know where to put your submarines.

Edited for: Maybe some mines as well.


We've been doing some of that with mines but submarines have been mostly dying in droves to ASW air and sea. Still trying though. His CAP is already Deathstar enough to stop anything but a Herculean strike... and he's staying just far enough out of range to avoid that.

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 420
Page:   <<   < prev  11 12 13 [14] 15   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Pacific War 3.0 (No Encircled please!) Page: <<   < prev  11 12 13 [14] 15   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

0.281