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: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A))

 
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: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) Page: <<   < prev  91 92 [93] 94 95   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/20/2021 8:30:35 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21732
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Hauling cargo to Australia and NZ is the best use of the E2C's



Definitive statements like that are begging to proved wrong. Somehow.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 2761
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/20/2021 9:18:58 PM   
mind_messing

 

Posts: 3256
Joined: 10/28/2013
From: Glasgow, Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

What do the rest of you AFBs do with Liberty ships...convert them to troop ships?



Yup, troopships all the way. You get plenty of cargo carrying capacity as the Allies, but there's always a need for troopships. It helps to have lots lying around as there will be lots of arrivals that won't cycle with your regular troop convoys.

Sure, they lose carrying capacity, but with 20 ships you'll be carrying more than enough supply anyhow. Getting to Oz and back on a tank of gas means you won't be caring about fuel efficiency anyhow.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2762
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/20/2021 10:36:12 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21732
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
May 26th, 1942

Hit this little girl twice, and one exploded!






Attachment (1)

(in reply to mind_messing)
Post #: 2763
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/20/2021 10:37:19 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21732
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
In the afternoon, Grampus attacks again, and again, all fail to explode. Her gun leaves the ship on fire.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2764
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/20/2021 10:44:59 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21732
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Tanks attack! All of our battered Corps safely escape the hex...

Ground combat at 83,44 (near Ankang)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 3768 troops, 64 guns, 554 vehicles, Assault Value = 1020

Defending force 30767 troops, 184 guns, 58 vehicles, Assault Value = 1020

Japanese adjusted assault: 168

Allied adjusted defense: 1105

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 6

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
Vehicles lost 71 (2 destroyed, 69 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
861 casualties reported
Squads: 3 destroyed, 60 disabled
Non Combat: 4 destroyed, 13 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 5 disabled
Guns lost 6 (2 destroyed, 4 disabled)
Vehicles lost 34 (20 destroyed, 14 disabled)




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2765
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/20/2021 10:45:50 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21732
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Taking Bowen...






Ground combat at Bowen (93,147)

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 12501 troops, 326 guns, 219 vehicles, Assault Value = 1537

Defending force 1455 troops, 21 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 4

Allied adjusted assault: 327

Japanese adjusted defense: 11

Allied assault odds: 29 to 1 (fort level 1)

Allied forces CAPTURE Bowen !!!

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), preparation(-), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker: shock(+)

Japanese ground losses:
470 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 20 destroyed, 3 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 20 (15 destroyed, 5 disabled)
Units retreated 2

Allied ground losses:
6 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Units pursuing 13

Defeated Japanese Units Retreating!

Assaulting units:
3rd Motor Brigade
2/9th Armoured Regiment
2nd Australian Division
13th Australian Brigade
41st Infantry Division
2/7th Armoured Regiment
182nd Infantry Regiment
193rd Tank Battalion
132nd Infantry Regiment
30th Australian Brigade
2/6th Armoured Regiment
754th Tank Battalion
6th Aus Cav Brigade
2/16th Field Regiment
2nd Medium Regiment
108th Anti Tank Regiment
97th Coast AA Regiment
1st Medium Regiment
I Australian Corps
21/22 Field Regiment

Defending units:
48th Field AA Battalion
35th JNAF AF Unit

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 7/20/2021 10:47:11 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2766
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/20/2021 10:46:39 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21732
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Holding Clark...

Ground combat at Clark Field (79,76)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 20786 troops, 403 guns, 597 vehicles, Assault Value = 762

Defending force 34516 troops, 385 guns, 244 vehicles, Assault Value = 1112

Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 0

Japanese adjusted assault: 361

Allied adjusted defense: 1447

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 4 (fort level 0)

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
1381 casualties reported
Squads: 10 destroyed, 94 disabled
Non Combat: 2 destroyed, 11 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 8 disabled
Guns lost 18 (1 destroyed, 17 disabled)
Vehicles lost 28 (2 destroyed, 26 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
319 casualties reported
Squads: 2 destroyed, 22 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 6 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 11 (1 destroyed, 10 disabled)


Mindanao falls...

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2767
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/20/2021 10:51:34 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21732
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Evacuated! Tomorrow Townsville will be ours (muhaha!)






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 7/20/2021 11:11:38 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2768
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/20/2021 10:54:45 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21732
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
She expended all those torpedoes and only one exploded!






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2769
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/20/2021 10:58:00 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21732
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Grabbed 10K supply from the Japanese.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2770
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/21/2021 2:51:35 AM   
CaptBeefheart


Posts: 2241
Joined: 7/4/2003
From: Seoul, Korea
Status: offline
Regarding the Liberties, I like converting a few to xAPs as I go, depending on how many I need to move troops around. I might have mentioned this before, but one thing to keep in mind is that at some point in June 1943 it becomes impossible to convert them (you can probably confirm this in the database). I tend to convert about as many as possible by then, as they roll off the slips as fixed xAKs after that and usually there's no shortage of cargo capacity by then.

Cheers,
CB

< Message edited by CaptBeefheart -- 7/21/2021 2:52:52 AM >


_____________________________

Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2771
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/21/2021 2:16:34 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21732
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
May 27, 1942

Another attack on the Ankang Road...

Ground combat at 83,44 (near Ankang)

Japanese Deliberate attack

Attacking force 28669 troops, 268 guns, 529 vehicles, Assault Value = 1006

Defending force 30006 troops, 182 guns, 44 vehicles, Assault Value = 914

Japanese adjusted assault: 364

Allied adjusted defense: 2674

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 7

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
330 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 33 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 27 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Vehicles lost 69 (1 destroyed, 68 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
676 casualties reported
Squads: 6 destroyed, 193 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 14 disabled
Engineers: 1 destroyed, 10 disabled

Assaulting units:
15th Tank Regiment
13th Tank Regiment
10th Tank Regiment
40th Division
5th Tank Regiment
23rd Tank Regiment
36th Division
9th Tank Regiment
3rd Tank Regiment
11th Tank Regiment
13th Army
52nd Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion
51st Ind.Mtn.Gun Battalion
11th Field Artillery Regiment

Defending units:
93rd Chinese Corps
16th Chinese Corps
43rd Cavalry Regiment
95th Chinese Corps
23rd Indian Mtn Gun Rgt /2




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2772
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/21/2021 2:17:58 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21732
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Cleanup in Australia...paratroopers grab Townsville.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2773
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/21/2021 2:41:26 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21732
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
2nd day in a row where I have downed enemy fighters in A2A, but I have no idea where I did it at.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2774
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/21/2021 3:33:23 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21732
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Up to 291 supplies air dropped to China...many troops have 0 supplies in the field. It is very tough to get supplies to the artillery units for whatever reason as the infantry snarfs it up first.

I didn't have this problem before as Japan, and it makes sense perhaps to put the 105mm artillery into the better Corp first rather than the dedicated artillery.










Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 7/21/2021 3:35:29 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2775
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/21/2021 3:35:12 PM   
witpqs


Posts: 25769
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

2nd day in a row where I have downed enemy fighters in A2A, but I have no idea where I did it at.






Are you getting sync bugs?

_____________________________


(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2776
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/21/2021 3:36:14 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21732
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

2nd day in a row where I have downed enemy fighters in A2A, but I have no idea where I did it at.






Are you getting sync bugs?


Probably, I don't know how to check.


(in reply to witpqs)
Post #: 2777
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/21/2021 3:50:02 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21732
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Leader aggression...

Granted this units troops have poor experience, but they have been in two fights and been totally disabled each fight. Of course they are up against superior numbers of IJA tanks like 10 times as many...but I had hoped for a little more staying power.

Each fight has been in x3 terrain with no forts.

I wonder if I assign a less aggressive leader will they not get disabled so quickly?

The armor units are always the first in line for supplies!







Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 7/21/2021 3:54:32 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2778
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/21/2021 4:09:43 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21732
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Our Chinese ace in the hole...

Finally have enough Valentines to upgrade this unit to some...but they are holding Bhamo. So I got to move units there to cover them, and then trek across China to Kunming most likely where we can upgrade those hvy impr AFVs to Valentines, maybe have enough Stuarts to upgrade those too, and then move them for the likely siege of Chungking or guarding the routes south out of Chungking or fighting the IJA tank divisions coming up from Canton which I am sure will be on their way eventually (the last is most likely).

A look at the Commonwealth tank pools...Matildas & Grant/Lees to Australia.

50+ Grant/Lees show up in 15 days, another 50+ in 30, and 20+ in 37. But no Valentines on the convoy horizon...










Attachment (1)

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2779
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/21/2021 4:16:14 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21732
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
Wouldn't absolutely suck to have this unit sucking up Valentine reinforcements? It can take 150+ of the beasties.

Or is there a way to disband it?






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 7/21/2021 4:18:21 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2780
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/21/2021 4:50:05 PM   
821Bobo


Posts: 2252
Joined: 2/8/2011
From: Slovakia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

2nd day in a row where I have downed enemy fighters in A2A, but I have no idea where I did it at.






Are you getting sync bugs?


Probably, I don't know how to check.




When you open the save file it always generates the correct combat report.

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2781
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/21/2021 5:12:46 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 17268
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe


quote:

ORIGINAL: witpqs


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

2nd day in a row where I have downed enemy fighters in A2A, but I have no idea where I did it at.






Are you getting sync bugs?


Probably, I don't know how to check.



Do you have any B-17s on search missions? Any new B-17 aces?

_____________________________

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 Lowpe)
Post #: 2782
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/21/2021 5:17:01 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 17268
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Leader aggression...

Granted this units troops have poor experience, but they have been in two fights and been totally disabled each fight. Of course they are up against superior numbers of IJA tanks like 10 times as many...but I had hoped for a little more staying power.

Each fight has been in x3 terrain with no forts.

I wonder if I assign a less aggressive leader will they not get disabled so quickly?

The armor units are always the first in line for supplies!







Don't believe the unit screen saying only 12 Support is needed. Support is what repairs the damaged vehicles and sick squads, no? So you need 27 active support to get the unit back fighting, or have more time between combats for the 12 support to bring them along.

_____________________________

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 Lowpe)
Post #: 2783
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/21/2021 5:20:45 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 17268
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lowpe

Our Chinese ace in the hole...

Finally have enough Valentines to upgrade this unit to some...but they are holding Bhamo. So I got to move units there to cover them, and then trek across China to Kunming most likely where we can upgrade those hvy impr AFVs to Valentines, maybe have enough Stuarts to upgrade those too, and then move them for the likely siege of Chungking or guarding the routes south out of Chungking or fighting the IJA tank divisions coming up from Canton which I am sure will be on their way eventually (the last is most likely).

A look at the Commonwealth tank pools...Matildas & Grant/Lees to Australia.

50+ Grant/Lees show up in 15 days, another 50+ in 30, and 20+ in 37. But no Valentines on the convoy horizon...


In stock I never got to use all the Valentines in the pools because the units upgraded to better tanks before they could take Valentine replacements. I didn't leave them on "do not upgrade" because there were enough of the other tanks coming to make it worthwhile to let them upgrade ASAP. But then again the AI was not putting the kind of pressure on that your opponent is ...

EDIT: Just checked my game. NZ 1st Army Tank is still sitting in NZ, set to not upgrade nor take replacements and the pools have 150 Valentine IIs. The unit TOE shows it can upgrade to Grant/Lee type tanks, but it is Perm Restricted so it will sit as is - in a backwater. The active tank units never needed the Valentines so I could have let them go to 1st Army Tank.

< Message edited by BBfanboy -- 7/21/2021 5:32:17 PM >


_____________________________

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 Lowpe)
Post #: 2784
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/21/2021 7:14:13 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21732
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

[quote
EDIT: Just checked my game. NZ 1st Army Tank is still sitting in NZ, set to not upgrade nor take replacements and the pools have 150 Valentine IIs. The unit TOE shows it can upgrade to Grant/Lee type tanks, but it is Perm Restricted so it will sit as is - in a backwater. The active tank units never needed the Valentines so I could have let them go to 1st Army Tank.
[/quote]

In my game, this dababes game, they stay Valentines.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 2785
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/21/2021 7:16:14 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21732
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


Don't believe the unit screen saying only 12 Support is needed. Support is what repairs the damaged vehicles and sick squads, no? So you need 27 active support to get the unit back fighting, or have more time between combats for the 12 support to bring them along.


It is based off the number of active (not disabled or total) combat squads. So with 12 support it can fight at 100% (based on support). Doesn't mean it will repair faster etc, etc.


(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 2786
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/21/2021 7:19:29 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21732
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

Do you have any B-17s on search missions? Any new B-17 aces?


Nope, but I probably should use them to search out the KB or over heavily defended air bases.

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 2787
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/21/2021 9:27:40 PM   
Lowpe


Posts: 21732
Joined: 2/25/2013
Status: offline
I was afraid of some kind of railroad ambush in all this open terrain. I did have some short legged Wirraways flying commanders choice recon, but added some long range Hudsons too...plus bombers including our Dutch B25cs.

Moving on Broome and Darwin now and lots of troops are on the rails and looking over maps.

We won't forget Kalgoorlie, and will start the long march out to see what we can find....definitely not a priority move, but I should have plenty of forces to make it look good.

Also leaving plenty of AA units along the resource rich coastlines where the KB might come calling by surprise.

Starting to think about Horn Island, New Guinea and the Solomons...we still have lots of dot bases.






First P38E squadron (and only unrestricted sqdrn) is approaching New Zealand...perhaps they will make it in time for Darwin.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Lowpe -- 7/21/2021 9:29:17 PM >

(in reply to Lowpe)
Post #: 2788
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/21/2021 10:26:46 PM   
RangerJoe


Posts: 12588
Joined: 11/16/2015
From: My Mother, although my Father had some small part.
Status: online
Set some 4Es to ground combat going west along the railroad to kalgoorlie, slowly increasing the range until you detect the enemy.

_____________________________

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 Lowpe)
Post #: 2789
RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) - 7/21/2021 10:52:08 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9853
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
LCUs that are scheduled to be withdrawn cannot be disbanded to get their devices.

Device upgrades will go the the LCUs with the lower ID number first. MichaelM never got around to being able for each LCU to select which devices to upgrade or not. He had mention this near his last few patches. Damn, it would have been nice, especially for all those CW troops.

(in reply to RangerJoe)
Post #: 2790
Page:   <<   < prev  91 92 [93] 94 95   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Spanking Lowpe (NJP72 vs Lowpe (A)) Page: <<   < prev  91 92 [93] 94 95   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

0.430