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

[bigred]

Making the Turn I decided to go SW of Baker Is because I have LBA from Canton. It was a less aggressive move. To go NW of Baker was a more aggressive move. I did expect John to go NW but I was wrong and ran into him. I brought 1100 planes to this engagement in 3 CVTFs. On the phone john said he had CAP 90%. His 2 CVTFs never moved into same hex for mutual CAP support. I got lucky and he moved into my trap.

[bigred]

Day 2 is a let down for me. I have massive air plane losses with about 1/3 pilot loss. Bright side is some of those IJN CVs are reported dead in the water. I do have an undisclosed amount of surface forces closing on the area next turn.

[bigred]

Situation review and Loss recap:

[CaptBeefheart]

Well played, Bigred. As an AFB, I like to see the KB get hit like that.

Cheers,
CB

[John 3rd]

Hello All.

We haven't gotten much of anything done recently due to life and game issues.

On the BRIGHT side, my family has officially begun a long-term move to NW Colorado. WE bought a mountain cabin at about 9000 Ft Elevation four years ago and have fallen in love with the small town atmosphere up there. It has become tedious in the overpopulated Front Range of Colorado. Too busy, too crowded, and way too political for our tastes. My youngest graduates High School in just over a year and we plan to move after that. My young Chef plans on attending Culinary School in Steamboat Springs. We are selling our apartment building here and are buying another just on the Wyoming border. Big excitement and positive developments in that arena! Very busy juggling multiple realtors and prepping for the gradual move up there.

Paul showed some screenshots of the game showing a carrier fight near Baker Isle.

It is the culmination of a raid, staged by the two TFs of the Kido Butai (20 CV/CVL) who hit the Isles and then was ordered to pull back towards Tabitueau and Baker. In the process of doing that one TF decided to refuel (against orders--had hit the 'do not refuel' button). In refueling the Carriers gave up nearly ALL their fuel to the hungry DDs. Suddenly I was critically short of fuel with my AOs TF's still SW of Kwajalein.

The TFs limped back to Baker draining fuel the whole way. Spotted the approach of the American Carrier TF and divided the Carriers with the about half retreating to Tabitueau. The remaining half were crippled with no fuel and desperately waited for the arrival AOs. On our February 20-21 turn (remember we play two day turns), my AOs ended up ONE hex from Baker and two hexes from Tabitueau. I ordered the Baker CTF to retreat SW, refuel, and TRY to get away. The Tabitueau CTF was to refuel, move south, and then be in position to cover the Baker CTF.

NEITHER TF refueled!

1. The Baker TF moved SW before running out of fuel. The AOs were interrupted by a small STF of the CL Caradoc and 2 DDs. Understandably--and totally frustratingly--the carriers were left high-and-dry as the AOs panicked and ran for their lives.

2. The Tabitueau AOs did not refuel the CTF for any reason whatsoever. The CTF still moved south and is totally out of fuel. There is no understandable reason why the refueling did not take place. The CTF and AOs were set for refueling and only needed to move a total of two hexes to meet, do the job, and then separate.

The Baker CTF is dead. Simply as that. I accept the reasoning behind what happened.

The Tabitueau CTF should not be crippled by no fuel. Cannot understand why it didn't happen.

Does anyone have any idea as to why this wouldn't happen? Doesn't make sense to me.

02-24-44b.jpg (217.58 KiB) Viewed 976 times

[John 3rd]

Have to run errands and will Post more this evening.

[John 3rd]

Here is the Eastern TF that took all the Allied attacks:

2-23-44.jpg (125.49 KiB) Viewed 948 times

[John 3rd]

Western TF that SHOULD have refueled:

2-23-44a.jpg (131.61 KiB) Viewed 947 times

[John 3rd]

Morning of February 24, 1944.

Cannot move but one hex a day without fuel. The THUNDERING HORDES are charging down because Paul has ALL THIS INTEL that the Allied Commander would not have had IRL.

02-24-44c.jpg (273.35 KiB) Viewed 945 times

[John 3rd]

In a series of emails, this is what I have written:

Here is my thinking. Over half of my carriers have ZERO fuel. Since NEITHER TF refueled, the game is up. I cannot move (yes—I know ONE hex a day as you pointed out) and so BOTH TFs will be sunk in the next two day turn. You can sink them using your surface forces and not even risk your CVs or Air Groups to more attrition. This thinking leads to the destruction of 16-18 carriers plus 16-18 escorts. Those few with some fuel move east and, perhaps, get away. Those are the simple facts in the current situation. You won’t pull back so this is how it plays out.

Options:
1. I scuttle 30-45 ships to keep you from gaining their full VP. I will then contemplate Seppuku and that is that as we then move forward.
2. A limited mulligan is called. I leave the eastern Carrier TF to move as ordered while NOT moving the CTF near Tabiteau and this would allow them to refuel at the port from the AOs moving to them. You get the fight against the Eastern CTF and the shot of creaming them as they run out of fuel. At the end of the two days, one CTF is in a perilous situation (as it is now having taken 50% losses) while the other can maneuver to perhaps fight or withdraw (or something in between) next turn.
3. Declare a full mulligan where you can change your orders and I change mine.

Results from Options:
1. Total Allied Victory in one fell swoop.
2. Significant Allied Victory with great potential for adding to totals the next set of turns.
3. Unknown

Then the more recent note:

As said, I am wide Open to ideas.

An interim thought might be to re-run the last set of turns on Option B and see what happens. Treat it as the Line Islands invasion all over again to see if there is a huge difference.

Past that, throw out thoughts, ideas, and amazing commentary! :>
John


I am at a total loss. Readers have my thinking. I will do Option 1 or Option 2. Need some thoughts here.

Jump in Paul...

[BBfanboy]

Does anyone have any idea as to why this wouldn't happen? Doesn't make sense to me.

What was the threat tolerance on the AOs?
Perhaps they balked at the idea of being caught tied together with CVs when the SBDs show up!

[bigred]

In a series of emails, this is what I have written:

Here is my thinking. Over half of my carriers have ZERO fuel. Since NEITHER TF refueled, the game is up. I cannot move (yes—I know ONE hex a day as you pointed out) and so BOTH TFs will be sunk in the next two day turn. You can sink them using your surface forces and not even risk your CVs or Air Groups to more attrition. This thinking leads to the destruction of 16-18 carriers plus 16-18 escorts. Those few with some fuel move east and, perhaps, get away. Those are the simple facts in the current situation. You won’t pull back so this is how it plays out.

Options:
1. I scuttle 30-45 ships to keep you from gaining their full VP. I will then contemplate Seppuku and that is that as we then move forward.
2. A limited mulligan is called. I leave the eastern Carrier TF to move as ordered while NOT moving the CTF near Tabiteau and this would allow them to refuel at the port from the AOs moving to them. You get the fight against the Eastern CTF and the shot of creaming them as they run out of fuel. At the end of the two days, one CTF is in a perilous situation (as it is now having taken 50% losses) while the other can maneuver to perhaps fight or withdraw (or something in between) next turn.
3. Declare a full mulligan where you can change your orders and I change mine.

Results from Options:
1. Total Allied Victory in one fell swoop.
2. Significant Allied Victory with great potential for adding to totals the next set of turns.
3. Unknown

Then the more recent note:

As said, I am wide Open to ideas.

An interim thought might be to re-run the last set of turns on Option B and see what happens. Treat it as the Line Islands invasion all over again to see if there is a huge difference.

Past that, throw out thoughts, ideas, and amazing commentary! :>
John


I am at a total loss. Readers have my thinking. I will do Option 1 or Option 2. Need some thoughts here.

Jump in Paul...

I am thinking about my problem I have been having with learning the DBB invasion units and the stack limits which have messed up my ground offensives. (I am concerned about future invasions with no training gemme)

Also thinking about my APA shortage (24 sunk) and the 630 sunk AP/AKs which is causing me problems.

I may not be able to transport my army to japan.

Current VP count is about jp60262/usa39172.

I am not sure I can get a marginal victory later even with your CVs destroyed.

» Allied Decisive Victory: Allied VP Score is 1.75 times (or greater) higher than the Japanese VP Score

»Allied Marginal Victory: Allied VP Score is 1.25 to 1.74 times higher than the Japanese VP Score

»Draw: The Allied VP Score or Japanese VP Score is 1 to 1.24 times higher than their opponent’s score

» Japanese Marginal Victory: Japanese VP Score is 1.25 to 1.74 times higher than the Allied VP Score

» Japanese Decisive Victory: Japanese VP Score is 1.75 times (or greater) higher than the Allied VP Score

Currently you have a jap marginal victory.

I repeat, I am not sure I can get a marginal victory even if I sink your CVs.


a1.jpg

[John 3rd]

Does anyone have any idea as to why this wouldn't happen? Doesn't make sense to me.

What was the threat tolerance on the AOs?
Perhaps they balked at the idea of being caught tied together with CVs when the SBDs show up!

That is a good comment. I am sure that is EXACTLY what happened to the Eastern TF. The enemy was all around and it would only make sense to terrify the AOs Captains! It does not serve to explain the Western TF which was quite a distance away at Tabitueau. They, to me, are the key to all this. Had they done what was ordered (under no threat of air or surface attack), I would have one TF able to maneuver.

Paul and I spoke earlier this evening and he asked what type of fueling did I have listed for the Carriers? It was a great question. The Eastern CTF was ordered to do a minimum refuel while the Western CTF was ordered to do a tactical refuel.

[Bullshark]

Mulligan!

AO Replenishment is always "Full Refuel" by default. If your plan had succeeded Your CVs would have lost 1000 OPs points
to refueling and the DDs may not have received any fuel the first day. I think 1 1/4 days (or more) would have been necessary to refuel either task force. I think you would have been overrun at Baker if you had refueled.

Most players run into the opposite problem and have a full load of fuel but have used all their ops points, so they stay
in the hex of refueling for that day. I don't know if CVs fly missions having used 1000 ops points.

This is an excellent game and both of you have shown your skills and are setting up for one of the most unpredictable
games I have read. The allied player should always be magnanimus! He will face a newly envigorated player who will
be able to take the pounding to come. Doesn't he want a harder challenge in '44? I also have never seen that many IJN
CVs in one task force before and if your plan had worked you would have cut his CV force in half!! Monkey meat would be the main course in Nam for sure!

You withheld the KB while he CVE Blitzkrieged and now he should try and defend his extremely precarious LOS! You have played a patient defense and the allies should re-do the carrier orders for the turn and declare a 7 day truce around Baker Island.

[BBfanboy]

1000 Ops points is only one phase. After refueling in the AM phase John's carriers could have moved away in the afternoon. It is rare for Allied players to get a morning strike in if they did not detect KB in the night portion of the turn, or have a very high DL at the end of the previous turn.
Perhaps the problem with the fueling was having the TFs set to something other than Full Refuel? I haven't tested that. But if it is how the AO coding works that would be a player error that does not call for a mulligan.
Personally I think it more likely that the Carrier React coding (which is known to override other settings) may have interfered with the fueling orders, or the AOs balked the way bombers refuse to carry out strike orders if they do not have escort and the enemy is known to have fighters at the target.

[Bullshark]

1000 Ops Points is 24 Hrs, AM & PM phases. With 2 day turns you would have gotten some movement on the 2nd day.
If your CVs had more than half a tank they could have refueled in as little as around 400 Ops Points, leaving the PM
phase to move.

The losses sustained chart above shows how intense the game has been. A couple of questions:

1. You really favor the Oscar over the Tojo, is that because of their escort role and range?
2. 274 PT Boats destroyed. How did you deal with them with your airpower and which planes did you find worked the best?
(sometimes you had Oscars escorted by Oscars)

Thanks for this AAR and the ones in the past, we are all still learning little nuances of the game system and how to get
the most from our forces.

[BBfanboy]

No. 1000 ops points per 12 hr phase, not per day. The manual:

6.2.14 OPERATION POINTS
Operation Points (or OPs) reflect the time spent on refueling, replenishing ammo, and loading
and unloading of cargo. These actions reduce the movement of a TF during a Resolution Phase.
During an Orders Phase, if a TF refuels or is ordered to load troops, the TF Information Screen
will reflect the amount of time already used in Operation Points. Every TF has 1000 Operation
Points in each 12 hour Resolution Phase. Thus, if a TF refuels and the display shows a ship has
used 300 Operation Points, 30% of the 12 hours (300/1000) has been expended. This means
the Task Forces speed in hexes will be reduced by 30% for the first 12 hour Resolution Phase
resolved after exiting the Orders Phase. If a ship has any ammo replenished, it will use 1000
Operation Points. Ships that use 1000 OPs will still be allowed to move a minimum of 1 hex
in the phase

[John 3rd]

1000 Ops Points is 24 Hrs, AM & PM phases. With 2 day turns you would have gotten some movement on the 2nd day.
If your CVs had more than half a tank they could have refueled in as little as around 400 Ops Points, leaving the PM
phase to move.

The losses sustained chart above shows how intense the game has been. A couple of questions:

1. You really favor the Oscar over the Tojo, is that because of their escort role and range?
2. 274 PT Boats destroyed. How did you deal with them with your airpower and which planes did you find worked the best?
(sometimes you had Oscars escorted by Oscars)

Thanks for this AAR and the ones in the past, we are all still learning little nuances of the game system and how to get
the most from our forces.

Good comments.

The Oscar has been kept going for the exact reason you list. Don't use them a lot but I do like having that range occasionally to soak up Allied Fighter attacks.

Just ask Paul. He has PT Boats EVERYWHERE! Never had an opponent so wedded to them. This fascination has led me to learn how to kill those pests as often as possible.

Thank you for the thoughts on the AARs. Have always tried to use them for learning opportunities for both the reader and myself. This is the exact reason I Posted all of the above because I was curious about what people thought regarding the situation and if I was out-of-line asking for a limited mulligan. This is an important discussion within any campaign that is played. All players make mistakes within the game. Sometimes a redo is asked for and this very discussion takes place. Really, REALLY provides a good chance to stew on what you would do if you were in the middle of it.

That kind of thinking is very good to have PRIOR to it actually happening!

[John 3rd]

Always appreciate your knowledge level BBFanboy!

[John 3rd]

We have now almost sat on the game for three weeks. Wanted time for Forum discussion and some days to figure things out. Coming time to get moving again.

Understand Paul's position. He has a chance to destroy the majority of the Kaigun in a 2-4 day period of time. I hate it because it just doesn't feel right...wanted a GLORIOUS battle where strikes are exchanged and the Fleet dies in true Samurai fashion. Not--like--this!

Just probably being STUPID I guess.