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: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd

 
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: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd Page: <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/7/2021 3:16:25 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17111
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Three 500lb bombs scored several flightdeck deck hits doing a little damage: SYS +4 and three 20MM guns were destroyed on the Port Side.

Against CVLs or Hiryu/Soryu, three 500lb bombs would have been pretty serious. NOT to the stoutly built former Battlecruiser though.

BANZAI!




BigRed---STOP reading until you watch the 001 for this current turn!

_____________________________



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 #: 481
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/7/2021 3:22:08 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17111
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
September 25, 1942
Noumea, New Caledonia

Three Japanese Infantry Divisions receive the order to Assault to port of Noumea. No planes or ships bombard the target to keep the element of surprise. At Midnight--FLARES rise to signal the Banzai Assault. All along the line 35,000 screaming Japanese troops rise from their resting place and charge the enemy line.

It is over very quickly:

Japanese Shock Attack: Fort 1 Result 4-1 Base SURRENDERS!
Japanese Casualties: 416
American Casualties: 11,846 (1062 squads), 243 Guns, and 15 Vehicles.

Eight units surrender to the Imperial Japanese Army.

Nearly 40,000 supply changes hands. YES! That will help...






Attachment (1)

_____________________________



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 #: 482
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/7/2021 2:09:32 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17111
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Here is the current Victory Point Screen. The loss of the troops and of Noumea sees Japan gain 455 VP while the Allies lose 638.

You can peruse all the differing loss totals:





Attachment (1)

_____________________________



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 #: 483
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/7/2021 2:12:13 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17111
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Here are the current major sinkings of the Allied Fleet. The cruiser loss is significant and would be worse if my CVs had flown a few days ago when they had 4-5 cruiser targets in their sights!




Attachment (1)

_____________________________



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 #: 484
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/7/2021 3:12:40 PM   
ny59giants


Posts: 9853
Joined: 1/10/2005
Status: offline
The loss of pre-war CAs hurt as I use them mostly in CV TFs in late war for their AA. I use the modern CL/CAs in SC TFs with Mr Fletcher.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 485
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/7/2021 9:30:49 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17111
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
September 26, 1942
Ichang, China


Another day, another target FALLS! Ichang, China falls to a 636-1 result. Japanese Cas are ZERO and China loses three beaten-up Corps with 2,159 Cas (516 Squads) and 74 Guns.





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by John 3rd -- 4/7/2021 9:31:29 PM >


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to ny59giants)
Post #: 486
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/7/2021 10:10:36 PM   
bigred


Posts: 3533
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
post #9
quote:

ORIGINAL: bigred

I expect Japan to run a high VP count so first year my objective will be to keep John from getting an auto victory. If I pull even in VP count in 45 I will consider this a victory.

It is interesting to see John talk about his victory points. He seems to want to make himself feel good.

Also note my link to my AAR w FatR. Post #8. Check the vp count end of 42. Then end of game.

< Message edited by bigred -- 4/7/2021 10:37:51 PM >


_____________________________

---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2597400

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 487
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/8/2021 1:47:55 PM   
bigred


Posts: 3533
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
9/27a: Time for the IJN to get some R&R.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by bigred -- 4/8/2021 1:48:55 PM >


_____________________________

---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2597400

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 488
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/8/2021 1:49:12 PM   
bigred


Posts: 3533
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
9/27b: Grinding away in Burma.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by bigred -- 4/8/2021 1:50:05 PM >


_____________________________

---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2597400

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 489
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/8/2021 1:51:37 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 17268
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
Looks like some US Congressman blabbed that US torps do not work very well so John risked moving Amagi ...

_____________________________

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 bigred)
Post #: 490
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/8/2021 2:10:25 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17111
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
The enemy, in this Mod, have many more starting SS with GOOD TT then in RL. The British have a couple more, there are French SS, Australia has a pair of British, and there are more S-Boats. These additions have really made it more dangerous for my Merchies and Warships.

Amagi DOES appear to be a magnet for bombs and torps!

< Message edited by John 3rd -- 4/8/2021 2:11:39 PM >


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 491
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/8/2021 2:20:18 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17111
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Paul asked an interesting question when we spoke on the phone a few days ago. He stated how unclear he was about Japanese and Allied CV differences at war's start. As we gabbed, he expressed concern about Japan being too powerful. I told him it wasn't the case but it really got me to thinking and questioning some.

Decided for a full review of the forces on both sides at the point of September 1942. The results made me feel a lot better in defending things. Check out the next Post.

_____________________________



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 #: 492
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/8/2021 2:20:36 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17111
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
**EDIT**


< Message edited by John 3rd -- 4/8/2021 2:21:19 PM >


_____________________________



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 #: 493
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/8/2021 2:22:58 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17111
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
I couldn't cut-and-paste it without causing all sorts of chaos with the info. Let's see what this does:





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by John 3rd -- 4/8/2021 2:33:06 PM >


_____________________________



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 #: 494
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/8/2021 2:25:17 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17111
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
If ALL flattops are operational then the Allies are down just 56 planes total as compared to Real Life.

The info was fairly eye opening for me. I've always known that we are balanced but was very nervous to exactingly check it out. Well...here it is!

Take a look and ask questions.




< Message edited by John 3rd -- 4/8/2021 2:33:27 PM >


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 495
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/8/2021 3:32:43 PM   
BBfanboy


Posts: 17268
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline
From comments others have made, they implied that Japan's CLVs were made darn near unsinkable while the Allied ones are about as fragile as any 10,000 ton cruiser. That so? The plane capacity suggests the Japanese ones are much bigger.

_____________________________

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 John 3rd)
Post #: 496
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/8/2021 3:48:48 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17111
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
The only 'tough' Carriers are the CAV. They are the G.6 Class by specs. Over 17,000T with CA armor...everyone else is the same. The American and Allied Hybrids are armored similar to their cruiser hulls. Just like the Allied CAV/CLV they can convert to a full fledged CV in late-42.

The CVL complements are just slightly larger due to the addition of making them more of a scout carrier. Standard plane complement is 21 F, 9 TB, and 3 Scout Planes. Normal complement in Scenario 1 would be 18 F and 12 TB. So...less strike power, slightly more F, and 3 Recon aircraft.

The Recon planes are a variant of the Kate and then the standard Judy Recon Variant.

< Message edited by John 3rd -- 4/8/2021 3:50:06 PM >


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to BBfanboy)
Post #: 497
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/8/2021 11:05:51 PM   
Bearcat2

 

Posts: 577
Joined: 2/14/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Three 500lb bombs scored several flightdeck deck hits doing a little damage: SYS +4 and three 20MM guns were destroyed on the Port Side.

Against CVLs or Hiryu/Soryu, three 500lb bombs would have been pretty serious. NOT to the stoutly built former Battlecruiser though.

BANZAI!
........................


IRL, the 500lb bombs would penetrate the flight deck and detonate in the upper hanger; what they couldn't do was penetrate the deck armor, but the hangars and flight deck were built on top of the hull.
The 3 500lb SAP bomb hits would destroy at a minimum some aircraft stored in the upper hangar; the 500 GP [pen 45] against 57 deck is what saved the Akagi
Stock Akagi is 250 40 25 this scenario 250 57 25


< Message edited by Bearcat2 -- 4/8/2021 11:15:32 PM >


_____________________________

"After eight years as President I have only two regrets: that I have not shot Henry Clay or hanged John C. Calhoun."--1837

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 498
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/9/2021 12:02:31 AM   
bigred


Posts: 3533
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bearcat2

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Three 500lb bombs scored several flightdeck deck hits doing a little damage: SYS +4 and three 20MM guns were destroyed on the Port Side.

Against CVLs or Hiryu/Soryu, three 500lb bombs would have been pretty serious. NOT to the stoutly built former Battlecruiser though.

BANZAI!
........................


IRL, the 500lb bombs would penetrate the flight deck and detonate in the upper hanger; what they couldn't do was penetrate the deck armor, but the hangars and flight deck were built on top of the hull.
The 3 500lb SAP bomb hits would destroy at a minimum some aircraft stored in the upper hangar; the 500 GP [pen 45] against 57 deck is what saved the Akagi
Stock Akagi is 250 40 25 this scenario 250 57 25


I notice 2 bomb hits on the Zuikaku. looks like they bounced off the deck armor.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by bigred -- 4/9/2021 12:24:23 AM >


_____________________________

---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2597400

(in reply to Bearcat2)
Post #: 499
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/9/2021 12:25:08 AM   
bigred


Posts: 3533
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
This is the senario 55 shokaku-kai. Notice the deck rating is increased from 60 to 65.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2597400

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 500
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/9/2021 12:27:01 AM   
bigred


Posts: 3533
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
This is a comparison of the old akagi against then newer Amechi.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2597400

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 501
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/9/2021 12:31:45 AM   
bigred


Posts: 3533
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
This wonder about this CVL. Looks like it has the armor of the old Akagi.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by bigred -- 4/9/2021 12:33:05 AM >


_____________________________

---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2597400

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 502
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/9/2021 1:07:45 AM   
bigred


Posts: 3533
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
The deck armor on the Flecher in increased +1 in sen55. speed is reduced from 38 to 36. I wonder if the speed reduction makes it easier to dive bomb the fletcher. Hmmm.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by bigred -- 4/9/2021 1:15:09 AM >


_____________________________

---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2597400

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 503
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/9/2021 1:10:33 AM   
bigred


Posts: 3533
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bigred

The deck armor on the Flecher in increased +1 in sen55. speed is reduced from 38 to 36. As AFB, I will give up the +1 deck armor and keep the speed.






_____________________________

---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2597400

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 504
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/9/2021 1:18:45 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17111
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
Unless it is a new class, I don't mess with Allied ships. That might be a DaBabes change.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 505
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/9/2021 1:37:58 AM   
bigred


Posts: 3533
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Unless it is a new class, I don't mess with Allied ships. That might be a DaBabes change.


the belt armor got reduced from 18 to 13.

_____________________________

---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2597400

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 506
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/9/2021 1:52:48 AM   
bigred


Posts: 3533
Joined: 12/27/2007
Status: offline
Does anyone know the DaBabes discussion thread concerning the change to 36 spend and 13 belt armor for the fletcher's?

< Message edited by bigred -- 4/9/2021 1:53:11 AM >


_____________________________

---bigred---

IJ Production mistakes--
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2597400

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 507
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/9/2021 2:35:16 AM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17111
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
All the work done on these Mods is based off of the DaBabes work from years ago. We used it as our template from RA to Treaty to BTS.


_____________________________



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

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

(in reply to bigred)
Post #: 508
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/9/2021 1:27:56 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 17111
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline
In all the discussion, I forgot to show the other CV that got hit that night. This bad boy was fully intact with no damage prior to 2 500lb bombs hitting her.





Attachment (1)

_____________________________



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 #: 509
RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd - 4/9/2021 4:13:50 PM   
el cid again

 

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
The assignment of 13 mm deck armor on Fletcher Class destroyers is not justified.


As it happens, I served on a follow on to the Fletcher Class. It evolved trough the Forest Sherman class to become the Charles F. Adams class of destroyers. The latter was 18 feet longer, but otherwise had the same hull and deck structure. [It also had an aluminum superstructure - a mistake as it turns out - providing less splinter protection. Ultimately the ship got kevlar armor to help - more than a decade after I recommended it.]

The use of HY-80 steel might justify classification as armor, but (a) only if ALL steel ships got their steel decks and hulls classified as armor. I did that for subs - pressure hull thickness is called "armor" in RHS - intended to be relative to armor penetration of ASW weapons - which is actual - so a better protected sub does better than a less protected one does.

Anyway, the hull thickness of a Fletcher is 28 mm. The deck of all these classes is indeed 13 mm - but again only in a mod where EVERY steel ship gets deck thickness = armor. Worse, structural steel is NOT the same as armor steel. And protection is complicated - if one deck counts - why not the others? We usually add up armor for battleships with multiple decks
with armor. Equating regular steel with armor is a data entry nightmare - a practical impossibility. We don't know the number of decks, never mind their thickness on all classes. Worse - it is a lie. Armor steel is NOT the same as structural steel - although HY-80 is closer than earlier alloys were.

Sid

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 510
Page:   <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: Rising Sun, Falling Skies: BTSL Bigred vs John 3rd Page: <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   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

0.313