Big showdown comming.

[Przemcio231]

DEAMN i got more Brains that i thought i ordered my CV's to move  out of the Land hex and set all Land Fighters to LR CAP my CV's but if my orders will not be carried out with happend few times im toasted:( now im nervus... what is this Dutchmen planning[:D] BTW i ordered my LBA to bomb Kwaelejn and last day in Burma i ordered all advible LBA to hit Rangoon when i checked this turn they were all set to attack Mandalay[X(][X(][X(][X(][X(][X(] WTF

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Ursa MAior

Does anyone have an idea why these AAR's have nothing common with RL events? I mean it is fun and stuff, I am curious too, but hell 11 allied CVs in mid 43? 200+ land based IJN attack planes?

Set a trap for przemco.. I send out a suicide TF of 1 AP from kawa to trigger a MASSIVE strike from his carriers.
I have flown in 120 Valls and 60 betty's escorted by 200 fighters....

Well, this can't help...[:-]

[Przemcio231]

Any way Willie please do not use Gamey Tactics like this...

[Ursa MAior]

Yes a real bait should be like it is a real force like the japs did at Santa Cruz, or what jeffs did against me back in trhe times of UV. LonG Island CVE + some CAs+DDs and a perfect airtrap was ready,

[BrucePowers]

I don't know. I kinda like it (what can I say, I do). I think it makes the game interesting. Just my opinion.[:D]

[Akos Gergely]

It's not that impossible if You think about it, especially if You take into consideration that 3 of them are RN (well of course historically they are in IO except Victorious). You have the 6 pre-wer fleet CVs plus 2-3 Essexes by mid 43 plus 3-4 CVLs as well, so even if You loose 1-2 of the prewar CVs it is still about 10 CVs....Historically by Aug 1943 the USN had in comission Sara, Big-E, Essex, Lex II, Bunker Hill and Yorktown II as well as the first 4 CVLs, so that is exactly 10 CVs plus Victorious. I know that is frightening but that's the US warmachine...
 
Things changed markedly compared to 06-08. '42.

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: Przemcio231

Any way Willie please do not use Gamey Tactics like this...

It is one thing to have your ships in harbor flee away to avoid airstrikes but to deliberately try to pork a game system that is already primo BBQ ready is nasty gamesmanship. My 2 centavos anyway.

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: csatahajos

It's not that impossible if You think about it, especially if You take into consideration that 3 of them are RN (well of course historically they are in IO except Victorious). You have the 6 pre-wer fleet CVs plus 2-3 Essexes by mid 43 plus 3-4 CVLs as well, so even if You loose 1-2 of the prewar CVs it is still about 10 CVs....Historically by Aug 1943 the USN had in comission Sara, Big-E, Essex, Lex II, Bunker Hill and Yorktown II as well as the first 4 CVLs, so that is exactly 10 CVs plus Victorious. I know that is frightening but that's the US warmachine...

Things changed markedly compared to 06-08. '42.

But that is the point...many people think GGs respawn is based on some sort of empirical historical prescience. That's why folks say here...gee, how unrealistic, 11 CVs for the Allies in mid 43!!! You have already listed above two Essexes which will never arrive in a game of WITP if the namesake stays afloat, guaranteeing that the number of carriers available to the USN is always four less than historical.

Another point, we don't have the IDs of the CVs involved. They might include many USN CVEs. If one refers to a CVE as a CV, then the Allies have more than a mere 11 CVs by mid 43.

[Feinder]

The problem is that, it -will- (likely) trigger a massive strike byt 60+ bombers plus escorts, on a lone transport.
 
In reality, you might see a strike of 6 - 8 bombers go after after a lone transport, if that.  But no CV commander would send an alpha-strike against a lone freighter, let alone if there were enemy carriers in the area.
 
I don't care what they do.  It's their game, and if they choose to play "no holds barred" (I have one game like that), then so be it.  His opponent might very well be considering the same thing.
 
But "realistic", it ain't.
 
-F-

[wild_Willie2]

MAJOR slaughter on both sides.....

Today both sides lost over 350 Ac.. but, japans lost 60 on the grouns in Rangoon and vitrually no pilots where lost there...
At least I scored a few hits, and with a bit of luck both CVL's should sink...
Also, the allies lost a LOT of it's fightecover and must be low on AA ammo, so think that przemco will bugger out....

This will take some training to get pilot levels up again .....

Day Air attack on TF at 82,82

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 48
A6M3 Zero x 23
J2M Jack x 90
D3A Val x 20
G4M1 Betty x 42

Allied aircraft
Seafire x 25
F4F-4 Wildcat x 117
F4U-1 Corsair x 2
P-40E Warhawk x 1

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 40 destroyed
A6M3 Zero: 18 destroyed
J2M Jack: 68 destroyed
D3A Val: 9 destroyed, 2 damaged
G4M1 Betty: 17 destroyed, 8 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
Seafire: 14 destroyed
F4F-4 Wildcat: 138 destroyed
F4U-1 Corsair: 28 destroyed
P-40E Warhawk: 3 destroyed

Allied Ships
CVL Independence, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
BB Massachusetts
CVL Princeton, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
CLAA Reno, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
CV Lexington, Bomb hits 3

[BrucePowers]

I know you did not lose that many pilots, but those aircraft losses gotta hurt.

edited once again due to spelling. Note to self learn how to spell and type.

[Mike Solli]

ORIGINAL: Ursa MAior

Does anyone have an idea why these AAR's have nothing common with RL events? I mean it is fun and stuff, I am curious too, but hell 11 allied CVs in mid 43? 200+ land based IJN attack planes?

What's wrong with it? I'd say the Allied player is just doing better than history. Let's say he didn't lose any CVs and the British fleet decided to come play in the Pacific. I can see 11 CVs there. If you want RL, read a book.

[rtrapasso]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

ORIGINAL: csatahajos

It's not that impossible if You think about it, especially if You take into consideration that 3 of them are RN (well of course historically they are in IO except Victorious). You have the 6 pre-wer fleet CVs plus 2-3 Essexes by mid 43 plus 3-4 CVLs as well, so even if You loose 1-2 of the prewar CVs it is still about 10 CVs....Historically by Aug 1943 the USN had in comission Sara, Big-E, Essex, Lex II, Bunker Hill and Yorktown II as well as the first 4 CVLs, so that is exactly 10 CVs plus Victorious. I know that is frightening but that's the US warmachine...

Things changed markedly compared to 06-08. '42.

But that is the point...many people think GGs respawn is based on some sort of empirical historical prescience. That's why folks say here...gee, how unrealistic, 11 CVs for the Allies in mid 43!!! You have already listed above two Essexes which will never arrive in a game of WITP if the namesake stays afloat, guaranteeing that the number of carriers available to the USN is always four less than historical.

Another point, we don't have the IDs of the CVs involved. They might include many USN CVEs. If one refers to a CVE as a CV, then the Allies have more than a mere 11 CVs by mid 43.

Apparently, some of the CVs are actually CVLs ...

[BrucePowers]

I agree with Mike. Where is the fun if it just follows real life. Again just my opinion and 2 cents.

[Ron Saueracker]

Man I hope they are seriously thinking about revamping A2A.[:(]

[RAM]

If I read it correctly, it's nickmod... so its not the stock A2A.

what it's me, I don't find the casualties unrealistic, given that FOW is on. Note how the combat report losses are quite different to those reported in A2A in the intelligence report...

[Ursa MAior]

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

ORIGINAL: Ursa MAior

Does anyone have an idea why these AAR's have nothing common with RL events? I mean it is fun and stuff, I am curious too, but hell 11 allied CVs in mid 43? 200+ land based IJN attack planes?

What's wrong with it? I'd say the Allied player is just doing better than history. Let's say he didn't lose any CVs and the British fleet decided to come play in the Pacific. I can see 11 CVs there. If you want RL, read a book.

It must be my english.

I was wondering how -given there was a possibility- no such numbers were concentrated historically (at least till mid 44). IMHO the fleets had to defend territories, so they could only use say 50-70% of their strength on offensives. IN Witp IIhere should be a way to penalize leaving areas undefended, such as IJN emptying Home Islands or british CVs leaving IO before Malaya is neutralized. Etc.

[Mike Solli]

ORIGINAL: Ursa MAior

It must be my english.

I was wondering how -given there was a possibility- no such numbers were concentrated historically (at least till mid 44). IMHO the fleets had to defend territories, so they could only use say 50-70% of their strength on offensives. IN Witp IIhere should be a way to penalize leaving areas undefended, such as IJN emptying Home Islands or british CVs leaving IO before Malaya is neutralized. Etc.

Nope, probably my English. [:D]

That's the beauty of this game. You can do whatever you want. I've seen some people complain about the Japanese player pulling air units out of Japan. If you see your opponent do that, make a raid on the Home Islands. I play the Japanese and I make sure that any raid on the Home Islands won't make it out. [:D] If your opponent strips an area, hit him hard there. He'll rethink his strategy. If not, he probably won't be much of a challenge.

[MarcA]

OK, enough with the half time commentary lets get on with the second half. [:D]

[Mike Solli]

[:D]