AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/29/42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 1049 encounters mine field at Adak Island (98,36)
TF 1049 troops unloading over beach at Adak Island, 98,36
Allied ground losses:
158 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 1064 encounters mine field at Dutch Harbor (103,36)
Allied Ships
MSW Quatsino
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Karachi at 21,3
Japanese Ships
BB Yamashiro
BB Hyuga
CA Nachi
CA Mogami
CA Mikuma
CA Kumano
CA Aoba
CA Kinugasa
CA Furutaka
DD Hatsukaze
DD Natsushio
Allied Ships
AK Empire Pennant, Shell hits 14, and is sunk
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Karachi at 21,3
Japanese Ships
BB Yamashiro, Shell hits 2
BB Hyuga, Shell hits 1
CA Nachi
CA Mogami
CA Mikuma
CA Kumano
CA Aoba, Shell hits 1
CA Kinugasa
CA Furutaka
DD Hatsukaze
DD Natsushio
Allied Ships
DD Tjerk Hiddes, Shell hits 43, and is sunk
DD Tenedos, Shell hits 51, and is sunk
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Karachi at 21,3
Japanese Ships
BB Yamashiro
BB Hyuga
CA Nachi
CA Mogami
CA Mikuma
CA Kumano
CA Aoba
CA Kinugasa
CA Furutaka
DD Hatsukaze
DD Natsushio
Allied Ships
PT PT-36
PT PT-37
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Night Time Surface Combat, near Karachi at 21,3
Japanese Ships
BB Yamashiro
BB Hyuga, Shell hits 4
CA Nachi
CA Mogami, Shell hits 2
CA Mikuma
CA Kumano
CA Aoba
CA Kinugasa
CA Furutaka
DD Hatsukaze
DD Natsushio
Allied Ships
DD Arrow, Shell hits 59, and is sunk
DD Norman, Shell hits 33, and is sunk
Pretty good results from the battleline component at Karachi. 4 DDs and 1 merchant sunk for almost no damage being incurred.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Naval bombardment of Colombo, at 14,24 - Coastal Guns Fire Back!
Allied aircraft
no flights
Allied aircraft losses
SB-2c: 1 destroyed
Wirraway: 1 destroyed
80 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.
Japanese Ships
DD Hamakaze
DD Isokaze, Shell hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
DD Kagero, Shell hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
DD Akigumo
CL Abukuma, Shell hits 5, on fire, heavy damage
CA Ashigara, Shell hits 4
CA Myoko, Shell hits 3
CA Chokai, Shell hits 8
CA Takao, Shell hits 4, on fire
CA Chikuma
CA Tone, Shell hits 1
BB Fuso
BB Kirishima
BB Hiei
BB Haruna
BB Kongo
Allied ground losses:
2344 casualties reported
Guns lost 54
Vehicles lost 1
Airbase hits 6
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 24
Port hits 15
Port fuel hits 5
Port supply hits 2
Unfortunately I forgot to turn "escorts do not bombard" on and so 2 of my DDs and 1 of my CLs are heavily damaged by the defences of Colombo. Fortunately, while their damage is in the 90s, they are extremely close to Trimcomalee and its Level 9 port and are immediately ordered to make best speed for it. With only a little luck all three should survive although, with system damage in 80s and 90s, they are likely to be unavailable for duty for a great deal of time to come.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Naval bombardment of Karachi, at 21,3
Allied aircraft
no flights
Allied aircraft losses
Swordfish: 1 destroyed
PBY Catalina: 3 destroyed
Wellington III: 1 destroyed
Dakota I: 3 destroyed
Beaufort V-IX: 1 destroyed
Catalina I: 1 destroyed
Mohawk IV: 1 destroyed
Blenheim IV: 1 destroyed
Japanese Ships
CA Furutaka
CA Kinugasa
CA Aoba
CA Kumano
CA Mikuma
CA Mogami
CA Nachi
BB Hyuga
BB Yamashiro
Allied Ships
BB Warspite, Shell hits 18, on fire, heavy damage
Allied ground losses:
3788 casualties reported
Guns lost 36
Vehicles lost 1
Airbase hits 7
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 28
Port hits 11
Port fuel hits 1
Only 3,788 casualties this time. Undoubtedly the large number of surface combats on my run-in to the target robbed my bombardment TF of much-needed ammunition and ops points and thus saved Karachi from a much heavier bombardment. Still, this is fine, one of my main objectives with this run was to clear the enemy shipping from the seas around Karachi prior to the arrival of the full weight of my battleline so my primary objective has been well achieved.
In other news Warspite gets heavily battered again. It should be combat ineffective at this stage.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Naval bombardment of Colombo, at 14,24
Allied aircraft
no flights
Allied aircraft losses
SB-2c: 2 destroyed
Japanese Ships
DD Makigumo
BB Yamato
Allied ground losses:
558 casualties reported
Guns lost 16
Airbase supply hits 2
Runway hits 16
Port hits 2
Port fuel hits 1
Port supply hits 1
Ah Yamato. Welcome to the war. Musashi is about 220 days out but is being accelerated so should be available around the beginning of September... in good time for my move on Pearl Harbour if that's the route I choose to go. I have stopped accelerating Shinano in order to accelerate Musashi but once Musashi is built Shinano will be accelerated again. Right now I need the option of a very strong battleline more than I need Shinano in September 1943.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Naval bombardment of Amchitka Island, at 96,36 - Coastal Guns Fire Back!
112 Coastal gun shots fired in defense.
Allied Ships
CA Chicago
CA Louisville
CA Northampton, Shell hits 21
CA Indianapolis, Shell hits 30
CA Portland
BB Mississippi
BB New Mexico
BB Idaho
BB Colorado
Japanese ground losses:
376 casualties reported
Guns lost 13
I'm quite pleased with this result. While I am certain the coastal defences inflicted no major damage on the two American heavy cruisers it does prove that they will do significant damage to an amphibious landing and, more importantly, that my forces at Amchitka seem quite difficult to knock out. Under 400 casualties from a 4 BB bombardment isn't at all bad. By the next turn it was difficult to even see where the damage had been done as all I could find was about a dozen support squads and 3 guns which were disabled. By the day after even these were almost entirely back in action.
The only down-point was that with 13,500 mines present I would have expected some hits. i don't know what happened but I'm sure Trey will try again and when he does my minefields will be even more formidable and with a bit of luck several major combatants will be hit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 1049 encounters mine field at Adak Island (98,36)
TF 1049 troops unloading over beach at Adak Island, 98,36
Allied ground losses:
198 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack at 21,4
Japanese Ships
BB Yamashiro, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
DD Natsushio
DD Hatsukaze
CA Mikuma
Allied Ships
SS O19
Yikes [X(][X(][X(] Fortunately Yamashiro was blessed and suffered only 7 points of flotation damage. By the time it reaches Bombay this all translates into 0 flotation, 0 fires and 29 system damage so it will be out of the war for a little while but is entirely safe and WILL return.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 10th Group Army, at 39,34
Japanese aircraft
Ki-27 Nate x 38
No Japanese losses
Allied ground losses:
26 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on French Frigate Shoal , at 104,68
Allied aircraft
B-17E Fortress x 12
No Allied losses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 1st Tank Regiment, at 36,25
Allied aircraft
SB-2c x 13
No Allied losses
Japanese ground losses:
7 casualties reported
Vehicles lost 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 120th USN Base Force, at 42,58
Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 67
D3A Val x 92
B5N Kate x 161
Ki-27 Nate x 100
Ki-51 Sonia x 16
Ki-15 Babs x 2
No Japanese losses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 71st Chinese Division, at 39,35
Japanese aircraft
Ki-27 Nate x 25
No Japanese losses
Allied ground losses:
13 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 21st Chinese Corps, at 43,32
Japanese aircraft
Ki-48 Lily x 62
Ki-46-II Dinah x 1
Ki-15 Babs x 2
Allied aircraft
I-16c x 3
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-48 Lily: 2 destroyed, 3 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
I-16c: 1 damaged
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 81st PA Division, at 42,58
Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 26
D3A Val x 47
B5N Kate x 71
Ki-27 Nate x 43
Ki-51 Sonia x 9
Ki-15 Babs x 2
No Japanese losses
Allied ground losses:
71 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 19,9
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 7
Allied aircraft
Blenheim I x 5
Blenheim IV x 3
Wellington III x 2
B-26B Marauder x 5
Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 1 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
Blenheim I: 1 destroyed, 1 damaged
Blenheim IV: 1 destroyed
B-26B Marauder: 1 destroyed, 1 damaged
Japanese Ships
APD APD-38
APD APD-35, Bomb hits 1, on fire
APD APD-36
APD APD-2
APD APD-46
Another APD pays the price. Again, it won't sink, but it will be laid up for a while.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 19,7
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 8
A6M3 Zero x 7
Allied aircraft
Blenheim I x 2
Beaufort V-IX x 8
Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 1 damaged
A6M3 Zero: 1 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
Blenheim I: 1 destroyed
Beaufort V-IX: 1 destroyed, 5 damaged
Japanese Ships
BB Yamashiro, on fire
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on TF at 19,9
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 6
Allied aircraft
B-26B Marauder x 2
No Japanese losses
Allied aircraft losses
B-26B Marauder: 1 damaged
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack near Adak Island at 98,36
Japanese Ships
SS I-124, hits 10
Allied Ships
MSW Guysborough
MSW Caraquet
PG Moncton
PG Vancouver
These PGs are absolutely lethal to my submarines. Every time I venture close to them with an I class boat it suffers horribly. I-124 was on its way back from minelaying at Dutch Harbour and, unfortunately, passed through Adak Island. Poor routing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Chungking
Japanese Bombardment attack
Attacking force 320022 troops, 3581 guns, 27 vehicles, Assault Value = 6248
Defending force 176387 troops, 1238 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 3845
Allied ground losses:
322 casualties reported
Guns lost 1
Hmm, I disable and kill 1,000 Chinese troops every 3 days yet their numbers continue to rise. I wonder if they are recruiting cockroaches into their army?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at 42,30
Japanese Deliberate attack
Attacking force 17436 troops, 185 guns, 4 vehicles, Assault Value = 248
Defending force 8827 troops, 11 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 54
Japanese max assault: 250 - adjusted assault: 236
Allied max defense: 54 - adjusted defense: 51
Japanese assault odds: 4 to 1
Japanese ground losses:
50 casualties reported
Guns lost 4
Allied ground losses:
10 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Chengtu
Japanese Shock attack
Attacking force 8186 troops, 8 guns, 515 vehicles, Assault Value = 261
Defending force 16592 troops, 58 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 265
Japanese max assault: 448 - adjusted assault: 85
Allied max defense: 257 - adjusted defense: 101
Japanese assault odds: 0 to 1 (fort level 3)
Japanese ground losses:
163 casualties reported
Guns lost 1
Vehicles lost 12
Allied ground losses:
369 casualties reported
Guns lost 10
Hmm, this was an important battle. If I had gotten a 1:1 I might have brought the fortifications down again and been able to continue attacking. As it is my supply route to the forces in Chengtu is over such poor terrain that no supplies can get through. From here on in my adjusted AV will plummet. I will try a few more times as tank units seem to do very well vs Chinese units even with 0:1 attacks but, overall, I may have to pull them back and rebuild them before committing them to the road leading TO Chengtu.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Chandpur
Japanese Deliberate attack
Attacking force 19933 troops, 123 guns, 1 vehicles, Assault Value = 386
Defending force 10519 troops, 129 guns, 2 vehicles, Assault Value = 132
Japanese max assault: 316 - adjusted assault: 196
Allied max defense: 97 - adjusted defense: 43
Japanese assault odds: 4 to 1 (fort level 1)
Japanese forces CAPTURE Chandpur base !!!
Japanese ground losses:
227 casualties reported
Guns lost 2
Vehicles lost 1
Allied ground losses:
11041 casualties reported
Guns lost 71
Another good result near the end of the month. In India only Colombo and Karachi itself remain in Allied hands and with the battleline coming to Karachi I am hopeful.
Lunacy or Shrewdness?
Moderators: wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami
RE: Mines vs Minesweepers
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
Well, that's that settled then.
RE: Mines vs Minesweepers
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 05/30/42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 1064 encounters mine field at Dutch Harbor (103,36)
Allied Ships
MSW Quatsino
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 10th Group Army, at 39,34
Japanese aircraft
Ki-27 Nate x 45
No Japanese losses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Karachi , at 21,3
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 132
A6M3 Zero x 20
Ki-21 Sally x 217
Ki-49 Helen x 12
Ki-46-II Dinah x 8
Allied aircraft
Lysander I x 2
Mohawk IV x 6
Buffalo I x 2
Hurricane II x 3
Kittyhawk I x 5
Blenheim IF x 1
P-40B Tomahawk x 2
P-40E Warhawk x 4
Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 4 destroyed
A6M3 Zero: 5 destroyed, 1 damaged
Ki-21 Sally: 6 destroyed, 38 damaged
Ki-49 Helen: 2 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
Lysander I: 3 destroyed
Mohawk IV: 2 destroyed, 2 damaged
Buffalo I: 3 destroyed
Hurricane II: 4 destroyed
Kittyhawk I: 6 destroyed
Blenheim IF: 1 destroyed
P-40B Tomahawk: 2 destroyed
P-40E Warhawk: 5 destroyed
PBY Catalina: 4 destroyed
Beaufort V-IX: 9 destroyed
Wellington III: 3 destroyed
Dakota I: 7 destroyed
Blenheim IV: 2 destroyed
Blenheim I: 2 destroyed
B-26B Marauder: 2 destroyed
Vildebeest IV: 1 destroyed
Allied ground losses:
111 casualties reported
Guns lost 2
Vehicles lost 1
Airbase hits 51
Airbase supply hits 12
Runway hits 96
These aerial losses really aren't sustainable for me as they, essentially, rob me of my entire production of Sallys, A6M2s and A6M3s every day. Still I've got to keep the pressure up until such time as the battleline can take over. Once that happens I'll reduce my aerial forces to non-overstacking levels and turn Bombay into a rest and recuperation centre for my Sally daitai cycling them in and out of Samir and Ahmadabad as required to keep their morale high enough to be certain they fly. I'll also increase the altitude at which my bombers fly in order to reduce losses, trusting to the battleline to make up the difference.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Trimcomalee , at 15,25
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 9
Allied aircraft
SB-2c x 3
No Japanese losses
No Allied losses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 120th USN Base Force, at 42,58
Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 67
D3A Val x 91
B5N Kate x 145
Ki-27 Nate x 100
Ki-51 Sonia x 16
Ki-15 Babs x 2
No Japanese losses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 71st Chinese Division, at 39,35
Japanese aircraft
Ki-27 Nate x 25
Ki-48 Lily x 82
No Japanese losses
Allied ground losses:
26 casualties reported
Guns lost 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 81st PA Division, at 42,58
Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 29
D3A Val x 47
B5N Kate x 71
Ki-27 Nate x 45
Ki-51 Sonia x 9
Ki-15 Babs x 2
No Japanese losses
Allied ground losses:
7 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Karachi , at 21,3
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 10
A6M3 Zero x 11
Ki-46-II Dinah x 1
Allied aircraft
Mohawk IV x 4
No Japanese losses
Allied aircraft losses
Mohawk IV: 1 destroyed
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack at 32,64
Japanese Ships
PC Ch 13
PC Ch 32
PC Ch 20
PC Ch 18
PC Ch 17
PC Ch 16
PC Ch 15
PC Ch 14
PC Ch 3
PC Ch 2
PC Ch 1
Allied Ships
SS Nautilus, hits 8
A pretty tough ship there.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Chungking
Japanese Bombardment attack
Attacking force 193737 troops, 2335 guns, 5 vehicles, Assault Value = 6302
Defending force 176203 troops, 1244 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 3844
Allied ground losses:
226 casualties reported
Guns lost 2
Some of you may notice that my forces at Chungking have been falling recently. That is because I found I simply was not able to supply what I had. I am pulling troops and HQs back westward to draw supplies along the roads towards Chungking and, more importantly, I am going to finally clear up the hold-outs north-west of Changsha. Once these hold-outs are destroyed I will have reduced the length of my supply line to the forces at Chungking by over 2/3rds and increased its efficiency by a like amount. I had held off doing this previously as I didn't want to face these 16 units at Chungking but I think that I no longer have the luxury of that choice. My supply lines are too long and the increase in supply will more than offset the increase in enemy resistance. I will have to strike quickly though to reduce the fortifications to a reasonable level before these forces show up again.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at 42,30
Japanese Deliberate attack
Attacking force 17422 troops, 184 guns, 3 vehicles, Assault Value = 247
Defending force 8829 troops, 11 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 56
Japanese max assault: 249 - adjusted assault: 239
Allied max defense: 56 - adjusted defense: 51
Japanese assault odds: 4 to 1
Japanese ground losses:
19 casualties reported
Guns lost 1
Allied ground losses:
8 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at 23,47
Japanese Bombardment attack
Attacking force 5332 troops, 183 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 55
Defending force 2000 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 2
Allied ground losses:
19 casualties reported
In the next few posts I will conduct an analysis of the first 6 months of war, lessons learned and the current situation as well as how I intend to progress from here in both the medium and long-term.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 1064 encounters mine field at Dutch Harbor (103,36)
Allied Ships
MSW Quatsino
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 10th Group Army, at 39,34
Japanese aircraft
Ki-27 Nate x 45
No Japanese losses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Karachi , at 21,3
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 132
A6M3 Zero x 20
Ki-21 Sally x 217
Ki-49 Helen x 12
Ki-46-II Dinah x 8
Allied aircraft
Lysander I x 2
Mohawk IV x 6
Buffalo I x 2
Hurricane II x 3
Kittyhawk I x 5
Blenheim IF x 1
P-40B Tomahawk x 2
P-40E Warhawk x 4
Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 4 destroyed
A6M3 Zero: 5 destroyed, 1 damaged
Ki-21 Sally: 6 destroyed, 38 damaged
Ki-49 Helen: 2 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
Lysander I: 3 destroyed
Mohawk IV: 2 destroyed, 2 damaged
Buffalo I: 3 destroyed
Hurricane II: 4 destroyed
Kittyhawk I: 6 destroyed
Blenheim IF: 1 destroyed
P-40B Tomahawk: 2 destroyed
P-40E Warhawk: 5 destroyed
PBY Catalina: 4 destroyed
Beaufort V-IX: 9 destroyed
Wellington III: 3 destroyed
Dakota I: 7 destroyed
Blenheim IV: 2 destroyed
Blenheim I: 2 destroyed
B-26B Marauder: 2 destroyed
Vildebeest IV: 1 destroyed
Allied ground losses:
111 casualties reported
Guns lost 2
Vehicles lost 1
Airbase hits 51
Airbase supply hits 12
Runway hits 96
These aerial losses really aren't sustainable for me as they, essentially, rob me of my entire production of Sallys, A6M2s and A6M3s every day. Still I've got to keep the pressure up until such time as the battleline can take over. Once that happens I'll reduce my aerial forces to non-overstacking levels and turn Bombay into a rest and recuperation centre for my Sally daitai cycling them in and out of Samir and Ahmadabad as required to keep their morale high enough to be certain they fly. I'll also increase the altitude at which my bombers fly in order to reduce losses, trusting to the battleline to make up the difference.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Trimcomalee , at 15,25
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 9
Allied aircraft
SB-2c x 3
No Japanese losses
No Allied losses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 120th USN Base Force, at 42,58
Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 67
D3A Val x 91
B5N Kate x 145
Ki-27 Nate x 100
Ki-51 Sonia x 16
Ki-15 Babs x 2
No Japanese losses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 71st Chinese Division, at 39,35
Japanese aircraft
Ki-27 Nate x 25
Ki-48 Lily x 82
No Japanese losses
Allied ground losses:
26 casualties reported
Guns lost 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 81st PA Division, at 42,58
Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 29
D3A Val x 47
B5N Kate x 71
Ki-27 Nate x 45
Ki-51 Sonia x 9
Ki-15 Babs x 2
No Japanese losses
Allied ground losses:
7 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Karachi , at 21,3
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 10
A6M3 Zero x 11
Ki-46-II Dinah x 1
Allied aircraft
Mohawk IV x 4
No Japanese losses
Allied aircraft losses
Mohawk IV: 1 destroyed
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack at 32,64
Japanese Ships
PC Ch 13
PC Ch 32
PC Ch 20
PC Ch 18
PC Ch 17
PC Ch 16
PC Ch 15
PC Ch 14
PC Ch 3
PC Ch 2
PC Ch 1
Allied Ships
SS Nautilus, hits 8
A pretty tough ship there.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Chungking
Japanese Bombardment attack
Attacking force 193737 troops, 2335 guns, 5 vehicles, Assault Value = 6302
Defending force 176203 troops, 1244 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 3844
Allied ground losses:
226 casualties reported
Guns lost 2
Some of you may notice that my forces at Chungking have been falling recently. That is because I found I simply was not able to supply what I had. I am pulling troops and HQs back westward to draw supplies along the roads towards Chungking and, more importantly, I am going to finally clear up the hold-outs north-west of Changsha. Once these hold-outs are destroyed I will have reduced the length of my supply line to the forces at Chungking by over 2/3rds and increased its efficiency by a like amount. I had held off doing this previously as I didn't want to face these 16 units at Chungking but I think that I no longer have the luxury of that choice. My supply lines are too long and the increase in supply will more than offset the increase in enemy resistance. I will have to strike quickly though to reduce the fortifications to a reasonable level before these forces show up again.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at 42,30
Japanese Deliberate attack
Attacking force 17422 troops, 184 guns, 3 vehicles, Assault Value = 247
Defending force 8829 troops, 11 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 56
Japanese max assault: 249 - adjusted assault: 239
Allied max defense: 56 - adjusted defense: 51
Japanese assault odds: 4 to 1
Japanese ground losses:
19 casualties reported
Guns lost 1
Allied ground losses:
8 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at 23,47
Japanese Bombardment attack
Attacking force 5332 troops, 183 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 55
Defending force 2000 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 2
Allied ground losses:
19 casualties reported
In the next few posts I will conduct an analysis of the first 6 months of war, lessons learned and the current situation as well as how I intend to progress from here in both the medium and long-term.
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
Well, that's that settled then.
RE: Mines vs Minesweepers
It sure looks like that allied are doomed at Karachi. Your BB fleet can now bombard without opposition and your airforce has obtained airsuperiority in the area! Well played and I guess it wohn't take too long before Karachi falls! [:)]
6 Months In: How much longer can Japan run rampant?
Well with the coming of June I think it is time for not only my usual monthly update but also some discussion on lessons learned, operational and strategic analysis and outlining my future plans. I will start with a progress report using the in-game report screens as a basis including comparison with last month's reports.
In addition I intend to conduct a bit of an analysis of the extremely favourable attrition I have, so far, managed to perform on the more important Allied aerial and naval force types which, I feel, has played a significant part in limiting Trey's ability to hit back. While I've harped on repeatedly about assymetrical attrition wherein I have used renewable assets to cause attrition of less renewable Allied assets that was only ever half the story and in looking back on the AAR today in order to get the information from previous monthly summaries required for this analysis I realised that I never made explicitly clear my attempt to limit Allied mass by targeting of key units ( and ideally key, non-respawning units). I have always felt that everyone on the forums got far too hung up on the Allied mass and failed to take into account that with the appropriate focus much of that mass could be rendered significantly less effective than might otherwise have been the case. In addition I have also felt that while the respawn game mechanism is extremely questionable it is possible to negate much of its effect in-game with appropriate force allocation and strategic phasing.
Anyways with that said here are the first two components of the six month update. We'll begin with a resume of the Intelligence Screen.
Score:
The Japanese score rose by 4,087 points to 31,956 while the Allied score rose by 1,218 to 7,132. The points ratio this month is only 3.36 : 1 in my favour but overall is 4.48 : 1 in my favour although even that is illusory as with all conquests the toll the attacker pays relative to the defender in creating his commanding position is always very high. Once that position is capitalised upon the overall toll paid by the attacker from the beginning of the campaign to its conclusion is seen to be quite low compared to the defender. Also we must not forget that I still haven't taken Singapore. That is worth 2,000 points to Trey so, really, once India or China fall Singapore will be removed from play and Trey's score will plumet by a further 2,000 points.
Obviously though it is important to state once again that we aren't playing for score and auto-victory. If I were doing that I could easily have a greater than 7:1 ratio at this point and would be on the defensive everywhere except China in an extremely good position for somewhere between a 5 and 6 to 1 auto-victory ratio at the end of the year. Still that the ratio is very much in my favour is still indicative of generally good strategic position ( if not quite as good as I would have wished at this stage of the game).
I would also point out that the combined score we have is significantly higher than most games have at this stage of the war and also higher than many games have by the end of 1942. This is a testament to the intensity of the fighting on massive losses being suffered by both sides on all fronts.
Aircraft Losses.
This is an absolutely fascinating area and varies significantly from most AARs at this stage of the war. Combined aerial losses comprise 9,193 aircraft of all types with 5,459 allied and 3,734 japanese aircraft having been destroyed so far. This is a loss ratio of 1.46 : 1 in favour of the Japanese. Of these losses fully 1,883 allied and 801 japanese aircraft were lost in just the last month. This is testimant to the ferocity of the fighting over Karachi and, interestingly, a 2.35 : 1 ratio in favour of the Japanese in the decisive theatre.
This looks absolutely horrific but is actually not nearly as bad as it looks for the Japanese as many of my losses have been concentrated in my transport, bomber, floatplane and patrol squadrons which I have refused to allocate experienced pilots to, preferring instead to replace their losses with the rawest of recruits. These recruits are then preferentially culled in following missions. I lose the airframe and the crew but maintain the experienced core of the unit which is, after all, that which actually matters since the 80+ and 90+ experience pilots are the ones who actually manage to hit ships with torpedoes and close airbases with their well-aimed bombs.
I have found that in moderately contested areas a 36-plane Sally Daitai may comprise 15 elite pilot with 90+ experience, 15 pilots with 80+ experience, 3 with 50+ experience and 3 with sub-50 experience before being committed to combat. If, during the next week it suffers 8 losses it is highly likely that at the end of the week it will comprise 15 elite pilots with 90+ experience, 14 pilots with 80+ experience, 2 with 60+ experience and 5 with sub-50 experience.
In effect while the occasional 90+ experience pilot is lost to FlAK so long as one can avoid the predations of fighter CAP losses amongst 90+ experience pilots are extremely low ( and generally compensated by the graduation of an 80+ experience pilot to 90+ experience). The 80+ experience pool tends to drift downward very slightly as it suffers the occasional loss and its members graduate to 90+ experience while the 50+ experience pool tends to suffer moderate loss which is compensated for by the fact that all the time they are suffering these losses the survivors are edging closer to the 80+ experience pool. The vast majority of the 8 losses will be suffered among the 30-49 experience pilots. So in effect with 8 aircraft lost you might lose 1 x 90 experience pilot, 1 x 80 experience pilot, 1 x 60 experience pilot and 5 sub-50 experience pilots.
So, essentially, apart from my experiences over Karachi where the FlAK is just horrendous and routinely claims 5 to 10 Sallys every time they fly so long as losses are kept below 5% of sorties bomber daitai can be maintained at full strength and with excellent experience with absolutely no drain on the trained pilot pool.
In addition my policy of going after Allied four-engined bombers asymetrically wherever possible and symetrically whenever in my favour to do so has paid great dividends with the confirmed destruction of 593 Allied four-engined bombers ( essentially 100 four-engined bombers destroyed per month). Given that there is a monthly replacement rate of only 135 ( B-17s, B-18s, Wellingtons) the Allied four-engined bomber strength has been severely squeezed with a surplus of only 217 bombers. This really isn't sufficient to support the sort of long-term attrition which tends to occur when Allied four-engined strength is committed to break down Japanese-held islands.
Certainly that will change over time as Allied four-engined bombers are stood down and as the B-24 enters service and increases the monthly replacement rate to something on the order of 210 four-engined bombers per month but that it served to ease the battle for India and protect my Pacific holdings while KB was unavailable completely fulfilled my aims with this strategy.
Army Losses
Allied army losses have risen to 11,560, an increase of 956 on the 1st May while Japanese Army losses have risen to 761, an increase of 120 on the 1st May. That's what happens when you Shock Attack Karachi eh [:D]. Not my brightest idea ever by a long shot!
I'm going to keep a close eye on these loss figures as I'm curious to see what my new policy of naval bombarding Karachi and artillery bombarding Chungting will achieve in terms of attrition of enemy forces.
Naval Losses
The Allied navies have lost an additional 40 ships worth 700 points during this month. In reality Warspite, worth another 180 or so points, is essentially finished but since it isn't confirmed as sunk I won't be adding it in yet. I'm disappointed that I've only sunk 40 ships this month but that has really been because the Americans in the Pacific and the Australians have taken pains to stay out of my way. At the point of contact, India, Allied losses have been extreme and, to all intents and purposes, except for a rapidly diminishing submarine threat I now enjoy naval supremacy in the waters around Karachi.
Japanese losses for the month comprise 9 ships worth a total of 211 points. This seems like a major disparity but it has arisen due to the fact that CVL Zuiho, which was damaged in the carrier battle in April, sank in the first couple of days in May and so is counted in the current month's losses even though its doom was sealed beforehand. The only other surface combatants sunk this month were one of the destroyers damaged during the British surface strike on Bombay and a minelayer which was attacked by American level bombers while mining Laysan Islands. The other 6 ships sunk were all APs or AKs.
Political Points
As you can see they are rising as I'm saving up to purchase more AAA and CD for my Pacific holdings.
In addition I intend to conduct a bit of an analysis of the extremely favourable attrition I have, so far, managed to perform on the more important Allied aerial and naval force types which, I feel, has played a significant part in limiting Trey's ability to hit back. While I've harped on repeatedly about assymetrical attrition wherein I have used renewable assets to cause attrition of less renewable Allied assets that was only ever half the story and in looking back on the AAR today in order to get the information from previous monthly summaries required for this analysis I realised that I never made explicitly clear my attempt to limit Allied mass by targeting of key units ( and ideally key, non-respawning units). I have always felt that everyone on the forums got far too hung up on the Allied mass and failed to take into account that with the appropriate focus much of that mass could be rendered significantly less effective than might otherwise have been the case. In addition I have also felt that while the respawn game mechanism is extremely questionable it is possible to negate much of its effect in-game with appropriate force allocation and strategic phasing.
Anyways with that said here are the first two components of the six month update. We'll begin with a resume of the Intelligence Screen.
Score:
The Japanese score rose by 4,087 points to 31,956 while the Allied score rose by 1,218 to 7,132. The points ratio this month is only 3.36 : 1 in my favour but overall is 4.48 : 1 in my favour although even that is illusory as with all conquests the toll the attacker pays relative to the defender in creating his commanding position is always very high. Once that position is capitalised upon the overall toll paid by the attacker from the beginning of the campaign to its conclusion is seen to be quite low compared to the defender. Also we must not forget that I still haven't taken Singapore. That is worth 2,000 points to Trey so, really, once India or China fall Singapore will be removed from play and Trey's score will plumet by a further 2,000 points.
Obviously though it is important to state once again that we aren't playing for score and auto-victory. If I were doing that I could easily have a greater than 7:1 ratio at this point and would be on the defensive everywhere except China in an extremely good position for somewhere between a 5 and 6 to 1 auto-victory ratio at the end of the year. Still that the ratio is very much in my favour is still indicative of generally good strategic position ( if not quite as good as I would have wished at this stage of the game).
I would also point out that the combined score we have is significantly higher than most games have at this stage of the war and also higher than many games have by the end of 1942. This is a testament to the intensity of the fighting on massive losses being suffered by both sides on all fronts.
Aircraft Losses.
This is an absolutely fascinating area and varies significantly from most AARs at this stage of the war. Combined aerial losses comprise 9,193 aircraft of all types with 5,459 allied and 3,734 japanese aircraft having been destroyed so far. This is a loss ratio of 1.46 : 1 in favour of the Japanese. Of these losses fully 1,883 allied and 801 japanese aircraft were lost in just the last month. This is testimant to the ferocity of the fighting over Karachi and, interestingly, a 2.35 : 1 ratio in favour of the Japanese in the decisive theatre.
This looks absolutely horrific but is actually not nearly as bad as it looks for the Japanese as many of my losses have been concentrated in my transport, bomber, floatplane and patrol squadrons which I have refused to allocate experienced pilots to, preferring instead to replace their losses with the rawest of recruits. These recruits are then preferentially culled in following missions. I lose the airframe and the crew but maintain the experienced core of the unit which is, after all, that which actually matters since the 80+ and 90+ experience pilots are the ones who actually manage to hit ships with torpedoes and close airbases with their well-aimed bombs.
I have found that in moderately contested areas a 36-plane Sally Daitai may comprise 15 elite pilot with 90+ experience, 15 pilots with 80+ experience, 3 with 50+ experience and 3 with sub-50 experience before being committed to combat. If, during the next week it suffers 8 losses it is highly likely that at the end of the week it will comprise 15 elite pilots with 90+ experience, 14 pilots with 80+ experience, 2 with 60+ experience and 5 with sub-50 experience.
In effect while the occasional 90+ experience pilot is lost to FlAK so long as one can avoid the predations of fighter CAP losses amongst 90+ experience pilots are extremely low ( and generally compensated by the graduation of an 80+ experience pilot to 90+ experience). The 80+ experience pool tends to drift downward very slightly as it suffers the occasional loss and its members graduate to 90+ experience while the 50+ experience pool tends to suffer moderate loss which is compensated for by the fact that all the time they are suffering these losses the survivors are edging closer to the 80+ experience pool. The vast majority of the 8 losses will be suffered among the 30-49 experience pilots. So in effect with 8 aircraft lost you might lose 1 x 90 experience pilot, 1 x 80 experience pilot, 1 x 60 experience pilot and 5 sub-50 experience pilots.
So, essentially, apart from my experiences over Karachi where the FlAK is just horrendous and routinely claims 5 to 10 Sallys every time they fly so long as losses are kept below 5% of sorties bomber daitai can be maintained at full strength and with excellent experience with absolutely no drain on the trained pilot pool.
In addition my policy of going after Allied four-engined bombers asymetrically wherever possible and symetrically whenever in my favour to do so has paid great dividends with the confirmed destruction of 593 Allied four-engined bombers ( essentially 100 four-engined bombers destroyed per month). Given that there is a monthly replacement rate of only 135 ( B-17s, B-18s, Wellingtons) the Allied four-engined bomber strength has been severely squeezed with a surplus of only 217 bombers. This really isn't sufficient to support the sort of long-term attrition which tends to occur when Allied four-engined strength is committed to break down Japanese-held islands.
Certainly that will change over time as Allied four-engined bombers are stood down and as the B-24 enters service and increases the monthly replacement rate to something on the order of 210 four-engined bombers per month but that it served to ease the battle for India and protect my Pacific holdings while KB was unavailable completely fulfilled my aims with this strategy.
Army Losses
Allied army losses have risen to 11,560, an increase of 956 on the 1st May while Japanese Army losses have risen to 761, an increase of 120 on the 1st May. That's what happens when you Shock Attack Karachi eh [:D]. Not my brightest idea ever by a long shot!
I'm going to keep a close eye on these loss figures as I'm curious to see what my new policy of naval bombarding Karachi and artillery bombarding Chungting will achieve in terms of attrition of enemy forces.
Naval Losses
The Allied navies have lost an additional 40 ships worth 700 points during this month. In reality Warspite, worth another 180 or so points, is essentially finished but since it isn't confirmed as sunk I won't be adding it in yet. I'm disappointed that I've only sunk 40 ships this month but that has really been because the Americans in the Pacific and the Australians have taken pains to stay out of my way. At the point of contact, India, Allied losses have been extreme and, to all intents and purposes, except for a rapidly diminishing submarine threat I now enjoy naval supremacy in the waters around Karachi.
Japanese losses for the month comprise 9 ships worth a total of 211 points. This seems like a major disparity but it has arisen due to the fact that CVL Zuiho, which was damaged in the carrier battle in April, sank in the first couple of days in May and so is counted in the current month's losses even though its doom was sealed beforehand. The only other surface combatants sunk this month were one of the destroyers damaged during the British surface strike on Bombay and a minelayer which was attacked by American level bombers while mining Laysan Islands. The other 6 ships sunk were all APs or AKs.
Political Points
As you can see they are rising as I'm saving up to purchase more AAA and CD for my Pacific holdings.
- Attachments
-
- 1jun42a.jpg (37.3 KiB) Viewed 268 times
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
Well, that's that settled then.
RE: 6 Months In: How much longer can Japan run rampant?
Great AAR. !
Never argue with an idiot, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
RE: 6 Months In: How much longer can Japan run rampant?
Production
Well, what can we say about production? Essentially the situation is that supplies are down, fuel is down but pretty much everything else is up and the situation is excellent [:D]
Supplies have fallen from 2,050,036 to 1,968,074, a fall of 81,962. On the other hand I have consumed a minimum of 544,000 tons of supplies in my accelerating industrial expansion in the Home Islands so, really, I'm operating with a large surplus once my upgrades finish. I am about 1 month away from finishing all of my HI upgrades so that will free some supply but I'm going to increase the Repair Shipyard at Tokyo from 144 to 244 in order to more easily repair Yamato-class ships, continue the expansion of my naval shipyards so as to continue accelerating my shipping and am going to order an additional expansion of my Mitsubishi production to approximately 1200 engines per month.
On the HI front my perilously low reserves at the beginning of May ( 4822) have been transformed into a very healthy reserve ( 47,001) which gives me a little cushion to exploit for my upcoming aircraft expansion in August when Tonys and Tojos come on-line.
I am also having to budget for the planned expansion of Kawasaki production beginning the 1st of July in preparation for the commencement of production of Tonys and Tojos in August. Currently I am only R&Ding 50 Tonys and 105 Tojos but that is because I'm having trouble getting supply to my primary Tony production centre in order to repair the Tony factory there. The Home Area HQ has been ordered to move there in order to draw supply as having large numbers of Tonys available in October 1942 is imperative to my plans for that month.
The figures, for those who want them, are as follows:
Supply: Down about 90,000 but have spent over 540,000 this month alone on major industrial expansions. Am planning to spend over 500,000 next month also.
Manpower: Up by 1 per turn. Manpower reserves up by 37,000.
HI: Up by 162 per turn. Reserves up by 39,000.
Resources: Up by 31 per day. Reserves up by 168,000.
Oil: Up by 13 per day. Reserves up by 170,000.
Naval Shipyard: Production up by 73 per day. Reserves fairly stable. Yamato is being accelerated at the expense of Shinano. With a little luck Shinano and the Katsuragis should all arrive within a couple of weeks of eachother at the end of 1943, in plenty of time for investment of massive HI resources into long-range twin-engined kamikaze bombers.
Merchant Shipyard. Unchanged daily production. Reserves are essentially zero.
Shipyard Repair: Up by 54. Currently at 801. Am aiming for something around 1200 in time for the repairs necessary in November 42.
Armaments: Up by 12. Reserves down by about 1200 but still healthy.
Vehicles: Unchanged. Reserves up by over 1,000. Time to cut a bit of that production back. I don't want my tank divisions to arrive at full strength. I want to buy them cheap and let them build up during operations in Australia/Soviet Union.
Aircraft Engines: I've had a lot of problems getting supply to the appropriate places for engine factory repair but I recently cracked it. So engines have only gone up by 29 per month this month but next month I'd be surprised if I don't manage an increase of over 100 Mistubishis.
Aircraft Assembly: Airframe assembly has increased by 169 airframes per month. These increases lie mainly in fighter production ( currently producing 140 A6M2s and 104 A6M3s per month which is up from just 104 A6M2s 2 months ago. I have also almost doubled Kate production in the last month to 55 aircraft per month. Sally production lies at 113 per month and rising. It should reach 200 per month soon enough and will hold at or just below that level.
So all in all things are pretty healthy. My main bases in the Pacific all have between 20,000 and 30,000 supply with another 21,000 on the way to each in their monthly supply convoys while the Home Islands have sufficient supply to power through most of my industrial expansion programme. My main problem lies in siting some of my Tony expansion in a base with no port so losing the ability to ship in supplies from other bases with the result that the base supply level is not sufficient for the repairs required. The Home Area HQ is on the way and I hope that will do the trick. This game REALLY misses a "minimum supply" setting which players could toggle as the AI makes some very dumb decisions. I have 15,000 and 20,000 tons of supply sitting in several Japanese bases which have no industrial expansion ongoing and then a couple of bases which are expanding have less than the required amount. It is all very frustrating.
Well, what can we say about production? Essentially the situation is that supplies are down, fuel is down but pretty much everything else is up and the situation is excellent [:D]
Supplies have fallen from 2,050,036 to 1,968,074, a fall of 81,962. On the other hand I have consumed a minimum of 544,000 tons of supplies in my accelerating industrial expansion in the Home Islands so, really, I'm operating with a large surplus once my upgrades finish. I am about 1 month away from finishing all of my HI upgrades so that will free some supply but I'm going to increase the Repair Shipyard at Tokyo from 144 to 244 in order to more easily repair Yamato-class ships, continue the expansion of my naval shipyards so as to continue accelerating my shipping and am going to order an additional expansion of my Mitsubishi production to approximately 1200 engines per month.
On the HI front my perilously low reserves at the beginning of May ( 4822) have been transformed into a very healthy reserve ( 47,001) which gives me a little cushion to exploit for my upcoming aircraft expansion in August when Tonys and Tojos come on-line.
I am also having to budget for the planned expansion of Kawasaki production beginning the 1st of July in preparation for the commencement of production of Tonys and Tojos in August. Currently I am only R&Ding 50 Tonys and 105 Tojos but that is because I'm having trouble getting supply to my primary Tony production centre in order to repair the Tony factory there. The Home Area HQ has been ordered to move there in order to draw supply as having large numbers of Tonys available in October 1942 is imperative to my plans for that month.
The figures, for those who want them, are as follows:
Supply: Down about 90,000 but have spent over 540,000 this month alone on major industrial expansions. Am planning to spend over 500,000 next month also.
Manpower: Up by 1 per turn. Manpower reserves up by 37,000.
HI: Up by 162 per turn. Reserves up by 39,000.
Resources: Up by 31 per day. Reserves up by 168,000.
Oil: Up by 13 per day. Reserves up by 170,000.
Naval Shipyard: Production up by 73 per day. Reserves fairly stable. Yamato is being accelerated at the expense of Shinano. With a little luck Shinano and the Katsuragis should all arrive within a couple of weeks of eachother at the end of 1943, in plenty of time for investment of massive HI resources into long-range twin-engined kamikaze bombers.
Merchant Shipyard. Unchanged daily production. Reserves are essentially zero.
Shipyard Repair: Up by 54. Currently at 801. Am aiming for something around 1200 in time for the repairs necessary in November 42.
Armaments: Up by 12. Reserves down by about 1200 but still healthy.
Vehicles: Unchanged. Reserves up by over 1,000. Time to cut a bit of that production back. I don't want my tank divisions to arrive at full strength. I want to buy them cheap and let them build up during operations in Australia/Soviet Union.
Aircraft Engines: I've had a lot of problems getting supply to the appropriate places for engine factory repair but I recently cracked it. So engines have only gone up by 29 per month this month but next month I'd be surprised if I don't manage an increase of over 100 Mistubishis.
Aircraft Assembly: Airframe assembly has increased by 169 airframes per month. These increases lie mainly in fighter production ( currently producing 140 A6M2s and 104 A6M3s per month which is up from just 104 A6M2s 2 months ago. I have also almost doubled Kate production in the last month to 55 aircraft per month. Sally production lies at 113 per month and rising. It should reach 200 per month soon enough and will hold at or just below that level.
So all in all things are pretty healthy. My main bases in the Pacific all have between 20,000 and 30,000 supply with another 21,000 on the way to each in their monthly supply convoys while the Home Islands have sufficient supply to power through most of my industrial expansion programme. My main problem lies in siting some of my Tony expansion in a base with no port so losing the ability to ship in supplies from other bases with the result that the base supply level is not sufficient for the repairs required. The Home Area HQ is on the way and I hope that will do the trick. This game REALLY misses a "minimum supply" setting which players could toggle as the AI makes some very dumb decisions. I have 15,000 and 20,000 tons of supply sitting in several Japanese bases which have no industrial expansion ongoing and then a couple of bases which are expanding have less than the required amount. It is all very frustrating.
- Attachments
-
- 1jun42f.jpg (20.35 KiB) Viewed 268 times
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
Well, that's that settled then.
-
Monter_Trismegistos
- Posts: 1359
- Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 8:58 pm
- Location: Gdansk
RE: 6 Months In: How much longer can Japan run rampant?
Hi Nemo, I started to write this in PzB's AAR but I think it will fit here better...
I am your great supporter (I hope you will play even better than our current record holder - PzB - and show Allied players where is their place[:D]), but I can disagree with you about Karachi:
1. Teleportation? No there is not such thing - it's simply 2 month route via Atlantic. These troops are moved by ships in other direction. I see no problem here... Almost no problem - I agree that moving static units it's unrealistic. Also would like to see possibility to move in other direction - form Karachi to California.
2. Karachi cut off and besieged? No! You did not conquered any base behind enemy lines (maybe because there isn't such on map[:D]), but definetely you did not cut Karachi from their supply sources. By the way which leader (You are sying Hitler and Stalin? ...OK, but who else?) would let his big and only army in the theatre to being surrounded and besieged in city? They would retreat not stay and let enemy encircle them. Especially Brits. Look at Alamein. There was plans that in worst situation army would leave Egypt, as 8th Army was the only force which could ever take it back. Army itself was more important than groun or the canal. So, your statement that you encircled enemy is for me far from truth.
I am your great supporter (I hope you will play even better than our current record holder - PzB - and show Allied players where is their place[:D]), but I can disagree with you about Karachi:
1. Teleportation? No there is not such thing - it's simply 2 month route via Atlantic. These troops are moved by ships in other direction. I see no problem here... Almost no problem - I agree that moving static units it's unrealistic. Also would like to see possibility to move in other direction - form Karachi to California.
2. Karachi cut off and besieged? No! You did not conquered any base behind enemy lines (maybe because there isn't such on map[:D]), but definetely you did not cut Karachi from their supply sources. By the way which leader (You are sying Hitler and Stalin? ...OK, but who else?) would let his big and only army in the theatre to being surrounded and besieged in city? They would retreat not stay and let enemy encircle them. Especially Brits. Look at Alamein. There was plans that in worst situation army would leave Egypt, as 8th Army was the only force which could ever take it back. Army itself was more important than groun or the canal. So, your statement that you encircled enemy is for me far from truth.
Nec Temere Nec Timide
Bez strachu ale z rozwagą
Bez strachu ale z rozwagą
RE: 6 Months In: How much longer can Japan run rampant?
Naval Strategy/Priorities.
The basis of my naval strategy was that destroying American CAs, CLs and CVs early on in the game would only lead to them respawning sooner rather than later and allow the American to overwhelm me with modern CVs, CAs and CLs sooner than would otherwise be the case.
Obviously though, it was important to whittle down the American CV strength while KB was in India so as to prevent major counter-attacks but it was my aim to do so with as little additional expenditure of effort/American loss as possible. The reason for this was that for every CA or CL I sank while attacking the American CVs I would lose planes and pilots I would have trouble replacing while the Americans would, simply, gain a very capable CA or CL in 550 days.
American BBs, DMs and DMS do not respawn and therefore these are extremely high priority targets which, if destroyed, would tend to limit the American ability to counter-attack almost a much as the loss of a fleet carrier. I therefore designed my Pearl Harbour strike with a view to destroying the maximum number of battleships possible in one day and then, when DMs and DMS raced to escape my expected Day 2 strikes, I was waiting and took a heavy tithe of those precious ships.
British, Dutch and Commonwealth naval vessels do not respawn and so any effort put into destroying them would tend to be well-rewarded. This appreciation was one of the reasons I accepted such heavy aircraft losses around Ceylon and made such a major committment of land-based naval bombers to the Indian Theatre.
Below is posted an image of a table I drew up tonight to illustrate the effects of my targetting policy. I will discuss some of the most salient points now:
1. Carriers
Out of the 10 American and British carriers which have been present in the Pacific four have been sunk. Two will respawn but two are gone forever.
In conclusion, 40% of the Allied carrier strength has been destroyed at the cost of 1 of my 15 carriers. Only 2 of the 4 ships lost will respawn.
2. Battleships and Battlecruisers
Out of the 11 American and 7 British BBs and BCs present in the Pacific 3 US and 6 British BB/BCs have been destroyed ( or in the case of POW sent back to England with heavy system damage). In addition the single remaining British BB will, undoubtedly, be sunk in the next 3 or 4 days.
So, essentially 3 of the 11 American battleships have been sunk but all 7 of the British BBs and BCs have been either sunk or sent packing back to England. In conclusion 10 out of 18 battleships ( 56%) have been sunk or sent back to England. None will respawn.
Heavy Cruisers
Out of the 14 American Heavy Cruisers only 1 was sunk and even that was an opportunistic sinking when one of my CVE-based covering forces stumbled on an Allied convoy in the early days of the war. This vessel will, unfortunately, respawn. All 6 of the British and Commonwealth Heavy Cruisers have been sunk. That's obviously a 100% loss rate and none will respawn.
So, essentially, 7% of the respawning CAs have been sunk but 100% of the non-respawning CAs have been sunk.
Light Cruisers
Out of the 7 American Light Cruisers present in the Pacific one has been sunk... and that was only sunk because it was operating out of Karachi with the British fleet. It will, unfortunately, respawn. Out of the 22 non-American Light Cruisers present in the Pacific 17 have been sunk.
So, approximately 14% of the American, respawning, Light Cruisers have been destroyed while 77% of the respawning Light Cruisers have been destroyed.
Destroyers
22 of the 103 American destroyers and 27 of the 33 non-American destroyers have been sunk. It is my understanding that none of these destroyers will respawn. While destroyers aren't very important ships it is still nice to know that 36% of the 136 destroyers in the Pacific have been destroyed. 89 are still prowling the high seas and while that's a lot of destroyers it really isn't all that many once a few major naval engagements occur.
Major Surface Combatant Summary
Out of the 219 surface combatants of destroyer size and larger the Allies have lost 91 or 42%. Losses amongst non-respawnable ships have been even worse with 46% of these ships being lost. If one ignores the destroyers then the loss rate among non-respawnable ships rises to 67%.
Minor Surface Combatants
PG, PC and PT losses have been pretty heavy with fully 44 of these 63 ships having been lost. These losses aren't very significant but they will tend to put pressure on Trey to commit some of his destroyers to convoy escort duties, further thinning his screens and ability to commit to offensive action.
Specialised Surface Combatants
And now we get to the meat of the subject. 5 out of 6 non-respawning minelayers have been destroyed, 7 out of 9 DMs and 8 out of 13 DMS ( essential for guarding any bombardment runs from Trey's 8 remaining American battleships).
His minor minesweepers, which could have a roll as convoy escorts, have also been noticeably attrited with fully 33 of the 70 ships of this type having been sunk.
Really though the most important points here are the losses in DM and DMS types. I have seen 3 DMS at Dutch Harbour recently and I'd love to see them moving into range of Amchitka. With 13,500 mines those ships must run a good chance of hitting some of them. If they could be destroyed then with only 2 DMS still in operation American bombardment operations would become very risky indeed.
Submarine Operations
96 Allied submarines went to sea. 26 never returned and of those who did a similar number were badly damaged and unavailable for further operations for many months.
Since I know many players are having trouble sinking large number of Allied submarines under 1.801 I thought it might be beneficial to list the causes of destruction of the Allied submarines I've destroyed.
9 have been destroyed solely by depth charge attacks.
5 have been destroyed by ASW aircraft patrols.
6 have been lost to aircraft port attack.
6 more have been lost to naval port bombardments.
So, 14 lost at sea, 12 lost while in port. Of course those port losses are so heavy because I had a deliberate policy of ordering naval bombardments or aerial port attacks on bases I suspected held enemy submarines. Perhaps similar tactics might work for others?
Merchant Ships
79 APs, 28 sunk. 513 AKs, 138 sunk. Not anything which will massively inconvenience Trey since he is on the defensive but if this sort of loss rate could be maintained for another year then it would begin to have serious implications.
So, overall, out of 1095 Allied ships 398 have been sunk, representing a loss rate of 36.3% with the loss rate among non-respawnable major surface combatants being closer to 66% than 36%.
I think that, overall, this fully justifies my fitting my operational and strategic plans within the context of my national policy objective of seeking to limit, as much as possible, the strengthening of Allied shipping as the war goes on.
My own losses aren't exactly light but the majority of them occurred during the first 2 months of war when I was very much learning the game system and made a lot of mistakes. Still, even then my overall losses are quite acceptable and are as follows:
1 x CVL... Zuiho
2 x CL ( Sendai and Kinu )
23 x DD
6 x ML
1 x APD
1 x PT
6 x MSW
5 x PG
3 x PC
7 x AO ( due to damned pathfinding/distance travelled bug around Ceylon)
3 x TK
39 x AP
19 x AK
11 x SS ( 5 lost to enemy depth charge attacks and 6 lost to enemy aircraft while on the surface)
In the picture attached below the initial number represents the number of that type of ship on-map on 7th December 1941. The second number is the number of that type of ship which arrive in-theatre between 7th December 1941 to 1st June 1942. The number in brackets is the number of that type of ship which have been destroyed during the same time period.
The basis of my naval strategy was that destroying American CAs, CLs and CVs early on in the game would only lead to them respawning sooner rather than later and allow the American to overwhelm me with modern CVs, CAs and CLs sooner than would otherwise be the case.
Obviously though, it was important to whittle down the American CV strength while KB was in India so as to prevent major counter-attacks but it was my aim to do so with as little additional expenditure of effort/American loss as possible. The reason for this was that for every CA or CL I sank while attacking the American CVs I would lose planes and pilots I would have trouble replacing while the Americans would, simply, gain a very capable CA or CL in 550 days.
American BBs, DMs and DMS do not respawn and therefore these are extremely high priority targets which, if destroyed, would tend to limit the American ability to counter-attack almost a much as the loss of a fleet carrier. I therefore designed my Pearl Harbour strike with a view to destroying the maximum number of battleships possible in one day and then, when DMs and DMS raced to escape my expected Day 2 strikes, I was waiting and took a heavy tithe of those precious ships.
British, Dutch and Commonwealth naval vessels do not respawn and so any effort put into destroying them would tend to be well-rewarded. This appreciation was one of the reasons I accepted such heavy aircraft losses around Ceylon and made such a major committment of land-based naval bombers to the Indian Theatre.
Below is posted an image of a table I drew up tonight to illustrate the effects of my targetting policy. I will discuss some of the most salient points now:
1. Carriers
Out of the 10 American and British carriers which have been present in the Pacific four have been sunk. Two will respawn but two are gone forever.
In conclusion, 40% of the Allied carrier strength has been destroyed at the cost of 1 of my 15 carriers. Only 2 of the 4 ships lost will respawn.
2. Battleships and Battlecruisers
Out of the 11 American and 7 British BBs and BCs present in the Pacific 3 US and 6 British BB/BCs have been destroyed ( or in the case of POW sent back to England with heavy system damage). In addition the single remaining British BB will, undoubtedly, be sunk in the next 3 or 4 days.
So, essentially 3 of the 11 American battleships have been sunk but all 7 of the British BBs and BCs have been either sunk or sent packing back to England. In conclusion 10 out of 18 battleships ( 56%) have been sunk or sent back to England. None will respawn.
Heavy Cruisers
Out of the 14 American Heavy Cruisers only 1 was sunk and even that was an opportunistic sinking when one of my CVE-based covering forces stumbled on an Allied convoy in the early days of the war. This vessel will, unfortunately, respawn. All 6 of the British and Commonwealth Heavy Cruisers have been sunk. That's obviously a 100% loss rate and none will respawn.
So, essentially, 7% of the respawning CAs have been sunk but 100% of the non-respawning CAs have been sunk.
Light Cruisers
Out of the 7 American Light Cruisers present in the Pacific one has been sunk... and that was only sunk because it was operating out of Karachi with the British fleet. It will, unfortunately, respawn. Out of the 22 non-American Light Cruisers present in the Pacific 17 have been sunk.
So, approximately 14% of the American, respawning, Light Cruisers have been destroyed while 77% of the respawning Light Cruisers have been destroyed.
Destroyers
22 of the 103 American destroyers and 27 of the 33 non-American destroyers have been sunk. It is my understanding that none of these destroyers will respawn. While destroyers aren't very important ships it is still nice to know that 36% of the 136 destroyers in the Pacific have been destroyed. 89 are still prowling the high seas and while that's a lot of destroyers it really isn't all that many once a few major naval engagements occur.
Major Surface Combatant Summary
Out of the 219 surface combatants of destroyer size and larger the Allies have lost 91 or 42%. Losses amongst non-respawnable ships have been even worse with 46% of these ships being lost. If one ignores the destroyers then the loss rate among non-respawnable ships rises to 67%.
Minor Surface Combatants
PG, PC and PT losses have been pretty heavy with fully 44 of these 63 ships having been lost. These losses aren't very significant but they will tend to put pressure on Trey to commit some of his destroyers to convoy escort duties, further thinning his screens and ability to commit to offensive action.
Specialised Surface Combatants
And now we get to the meat of the subject. 5 out of 6 non-respawning minelayers have been destroyed, 7 out of 9 DMs and 8 out of 13 DMS ( essential for guarding any bombardment runs from Trey's 8 remaining American battleships).
His minor minesweepers, which could have a roll as convoy escorts, have also been noticeably attrited with fully 33 of the 70 ships of this type having been sunk.
Really though the most important points here are the losses in DM and DMS types. I have seen 3 DMS at Dutch Harbour recently and I'd love to see them moving into range of Amchitka. With 13,500 mines those ships must run a good chance of hitting some of them. If they could be destroyed then with only 2 DMS still in operation American bombardment operations would become very risky indeed.
Submarine Operations
96 Allied submarines went to sea. 26 never returned and of those who did a similar number were badly damaged and unavailable for further operations for many months.
Since I know many players are having trouble sinking large number of Allied submarines under 1.801 I thought it might be beneficial to list the causes of destruction of the Allied submarines I've destroyed.
9 have been destroyed solely by depth charge attacks.
5 have been destroyed by ASW aircraft patrols.
6 have been lost to aircraft port attack.
6 more have been lost to naval port bombardments.
So, 14 lost at sea, 12 lost while in port. Of course those port losses are so heavy because I had a deliberate policy of ordering naval bombardments or aerial port attacks on bases I suspected held enemy submarines. Perhaps similar tactics might work for others?
Merchant Ships
79 APs, 28 sunk. 513 AKs, 138 sunk. Not anything which will massively inconvenience Trey since he is on the defensive but if this sort of loss rate could be maintained for another year then it would begin to have serious implications.
So, overall, out of 1095 Allied ships 398 have been sunk, representing a loss rate of 36.3% with the loss rate among non-respawnable major surface combatants being closer to 66% than 36%.
I think that, overall, this fully justifies my fitting my operational and strategic plans within the context of my national policy objective of seeking to limit, as much as possible, the strengthening of Allied shipping as the war goes on.
My own losses aren't exactly light but the majority of them occurred during the first 2 months of war when I was very much learning the game system and made a lot of mistakes. Still, even then my overall losses are quite acceptable and are as follows:
1 x CVL... Zuiho
2 x CL ( Sendai and Kinu )
23 x DD
6 x ML
1 x APD
1 x PT
6 x MSW
5 x PG
3 x PC
7 x AO ( due to damned pathfinding/distance travelled bug around Ceylon)
3 x TK
39 x AP
19 x AK
11 x SS ( 5 lost to enemy depth charge attacks and 6 lost to enemy aircraft while on the surface)
In the picture attached below the initial number represents the number of that type of ship on-map on 7th December 1941. The second number is the number of that type of ship which arrive in-theatre between 7th December 1941 to 1st June 1942. The number in brackets is the number of that type of ship which have been destroyed during the same time period.
- Attachments
-
- 1stJuneL..es175.jpg (74.43 KiB) Viewed 277 times
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
Well, that's that settled then.
RE: 6 Months In: How much longer can Japan run rampant?
Monter,
Thanks for the input. I can see I should explain my issue a bit better.
Basically I have NO problem with troops moving from the USA to Karachi via the Atlantic and taking 60 days to do it. I do, however, have a problem with there being no possibility of intercepting these troops short of Karachi. I have over 100 Bettys flying out Bombay, more than 25 BBs or CAs doing continuous bombardment runs, 3 carriers and several-hundred army bombers operating out of Samir and Ahmadabad.
If reinforcement convoys come into Karachi then I realistically speaking these forces should have the opportunity to spot and react to these convoys. I have no problem with Trey sneaking troops into Karachi etc but "teleporting" them in is unrealistic. If they showed up on troopships with escorts 20 hexes from Karachi and then had to make their way to Karachi I would have no problem whatsoever since there would be some possibility of intercepting the reinforcements.
As it is no matter how airtight I make my naval and aerial cordon it avails me nothing since these troops just appear in Karachi on Day 60.
Other leaders who allowed their main army to be cut off and encircled rather than retreating... Hmm, I could point out numerous examples from the Peninsular War in the early 19th Century, various American, French and South Vietnamese operations during the prolonged war in French Indo-China, many of the holders of joint Consular commissions during the Roman Republic, Vercingetorix when faced with Julius Caesar, many of those who faced the Scythians in times BC etc.
Also I'd point out that Dunkirk, Arnhem etc etc are analogous to this situation. Forces in those areas were cut off and besieged but rescued by naval evacuation ( or evacuation using river-crossing equipment in the case of Arnhem). They did NOT benefit from the sudden appearance of fresh units in their midst which suddenly appeared out of nowhere. All supplies and reinforcements had to be brought in and all evacuation had to occur by means of naval convoy.
I have no problem if that dynamic is modelled in-game. My problem is with the teleporting in of supplies and reinforcement without any sealift being needed or any possibility of interdicting said sealift.
Thanks for the input. I can see I should explain my issue a bit better.
Basically I have NO problem with troops moving from the USA to Karachi via the Atlantic and taking 60 days to do it. I do, however, have a problem with there being no possibility of intercepting these troops short of Karachi. I have over 100 Bettys flying out Bombay, more than 25 BBs or CAs doing continuous bombardment runs, 3 carriers and several-hundred army bombers operating out of Samir and Ahmadabad.
If reinforcement convoys come into Karachi then I realistically speaking these forces should have the opportunity to spot and react to these convoys. I have no problem with Trey sneaking troops into Karachi etc but "teleporting" them in is unrealistic. If they showed up on troopships with escorts 20 hexes from Karachi and then had to make their way to Karachi I would have no problem whatsoever since there would be some possibility of intercepting the reinforcements.
As it is no matter how airtight I make my naval and aerial cordon it avails me nothing since these troops just appear in Karachi on Day 60.
Other leaders who allowed their main army to be cut off and encircled rather than retreating... Hmm, I could point out numerous examples from the Peninsular War in the early 19th Century, various American, French and South Vietnamese operations during the prolonged war in French Indo-China, many of the holders of joint Consular commissions during the Roman Republic, Vercingetorix when faced with Julius Caesar, many of those who faced the Scythians in times BC etc.
Also I'd point out that Dunkirk, Arnhem etc etc are analogous to this situation. Forces in those areas were cut off and besieged but rescued by naval evacuation ( or evacuation using river-crossing equipment in the case of Arnhem). They did NOT benefit from the sudden appearance of fresh units in their midst which suddenly appeared out of nowhere. All supplies and reinforcements had to be brought in and all evacuation had to occur by means of naval convoy.
I have no problem if that dynamic is modelled in-game. My problem is with the teleporting in of supplies and reinforcement without any sealift being needed or any possibility of interdicting said sealift.
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
Well, that's that settled then.
-
Monter_Trismegistos
- Posts: 1359
- Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 8:58 pm
- Location: Gdansk
RE: 6 Months In: How much longer can Japan run rampant?
Do you have confirmed information that PoW went to England? If she was heavy damaged I dont think it was possible to withdraw her...
Also if anybody could confirm or deny this... but aren't those withdrawed vessels reappear in 1944 or 1945?
Also if anybody could confirm or deny this... but aren't those withdrawed vessels reappear in 1944 or 1945?
Nec Temere Nec Timide
Bez strachu ale z rozwagą
Bez strachu ale z rozwagą
RE: 6 Months In: How much longer can Japan run rampant?
Well Trey and I had a chat about PoW and he told me it was sent to Britain. At the time I think he had gotten its system damage down to something in the 30s. Might be misinformation. He certainly snuck enough past me so I cannot outrule him getting PoW past me and into Australia.
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
Well, that's that settled then.
-
ny59giants
- Posts: 9902
- Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm
RE: 6 Months In: How much longer can Japan run rampant?
The British are required to withdraw certain classes of ships by the end of a month or else a PP penalty is paid for the class of ship not being withdrawn (notification of which one's are required is made at the beginning of the month during the replay) . If he had the Sys damage below 50, then that ship will magically disappear when in the port of Karachi by selecting it and pushing the withdrawl button. The American's don't have this, but that was discussed in various threads already.
I think the question of knocking out the British/Commonwealth forces totally out of the war by taking Karachi was addressed well in Andrew's extended map. The Japanese should not be allowed to go into the channel and take Aden/Middle East base as this represents the forces that will be available to counter-attack, eventually. Hopefully, someone will get to a point like you have and push the British and Co. out of India and have to start from the Middle East. It would have been nice to see this in effect in your game, but it will happen sometime (hopefully not to me in any of my PBEM games). [:D]
I think the question of knocking out the British/Commonwealth forces totally out of the war by taking Karachi was addressed well in Andrew's extended map. The Japanese should not be allowed to go into the channel and take Aden/Middle East base as this represents the forces that will be available to counter-attack, eventually. Hopefully, someone will get to a point like you have and push the British and Co. out of India and have to start from the Middle East. It would have been nice to see this in effect in your game, but it will happen sometime (hopefully not to me in any of my PBEM games). [:D]
[center]
[/center]
[/center]RE: 6 Months In: How much longer can Japan run rampant?
How many of the Commonwealth cruisers were Australian - they will respawn as well.
Destroying allied subs in port is a great move early on, why I tend to port attack Manilla on turn one.
Destroying allied subs in port is a great move early on, why I tend to port attack Manilla on turn one.
Robert Lee
RE: 6 Months In: How much longer can Japan run rampant?
Just wanted to reply to your comment in PzB's forum here as I did not think it is appropriate for me to do it in his forum.
I am aware that you have stated that if you do not have anything directly to state in regards to your tactics then not to post in your forum, but as this is something that you posted outside I felt that this one time I can post here even if it is not consistent with what you have asked.
Although I am not sure what was the full extent of exchanges between you and Timtom I have to say that I agree with what he said in regards to capturing Karachi. I agree with your claims of impossibility of certain actions, but as many people have pointed out Karachi was not meant to be captured as it prevents all allied reinforcements from arriving in this theatre therefore anything that helps the allied player defend Karachi in my opinion is fair.
So unless you and your opponent have agreed on certain rules precluding the above actions I think that you have no reason to feel that you are unfairly prevented from taking Karachi.
I am aware that you have stated that if you do not have anything directly to state in regards to your tactics then not to post in your forum, but as this is something that you posted outside I felt that this one time I can post here even if it is not consistent with what you have asked.
Although I am not sure what was the full extent of exchanges between you and Timtom I have to say that I agree with what he said in regards to capturing Karachi. I agree with your claims of impossibility of certain actions, but as many people have pointed out Karachi was not meant to be captured as it prevents all allied reinforcements from arriving in this theatre therefore anything that helps the allied player defend Karachi in my opinion is fair.
So unless you and your opponent have agreed on certain rules precluding the above actions I think that you have no reason to feel that you are unfairly prevented from taking Karachi.
RE: 6 Months In: How much longer can Japan run rampant?
bbbf,
Ah, well the Australian CAs will come back then... No biggie I can deal with them.
Marovici,
Well, game mechanics are fine. I just amn't interested in "You're a gamey bastage" arguments occurring. Ok, your view that teleporting in of supplies, troops etc etc into Karachi because the designer doesn't want it to be taken... aka the Deus Ex Machina defence.... is noted. I strenuously disagree with you especially since nothing in the manual etc spoke of this designer's desire and so warned me that the strategy on which I based my entire game was flawed because it conflicted with the designer's wishes ( as opposed to what actually is or isn't possible).
Quick question:
Given the completely hosed status of 1.801 is it possible to move back to 1.6? As I understand it 1.6 has a much weaker sub routine but still retains PDUs AND has a much better supply routine. I'll have to discuss it with Trey but I'm strongly considering suggesting a move backwards since they obviously seriously broke the supply system with 1.8.
Ah, well the Australian CAs will come back then... No biggie I can deal with them.
Marovici,
Well, game mechanics are fine. I just amn't interested in "You're a gamey bastage" arguments occurring. Ok, your view that teleporting in of supplies, troops etc etc into Karachi because the designer doesn't want it to be taken... aka the Deus Ex Machina defence.... is noted. I strenuously disagree with you especially since nothing in the manual etc spoke of this designer's desire and so warned me that the strategy on which I based my entire game was flawed because it conflicted with the designer's wishes ( as opposed to what actually is or isn't possible).
Quick question:
Given the completely hosed status of 1.801 is it possible to move back to 1.6? As I understand it 1.6 has a much weaker sub routine but still retains PDUs AND has a much better supply routine. I'll have to discuss it with Trey but I'm strongly considering suggesting a move backwards since they obviously seriously broke the supply system with 1.8.
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
Well, that's that settled then.
RE: 6 Months In: How much longer can Japan run rampant?
Aerial Losses December 7th 1941 to June 1st 1942.
Total Allied Aerial Losses total 5459 while Japanese losses total 3734. Obviously these losses favour the Japanese especially when one realises that a significant portion of Japanese losses have occurred in disposable transport, reconnaissance and floatplane units and amongst the less experienced bomber and fighter pilots.
In the Word attachment below you can see the results of the targetted culling of Allied force components and the special attention focussed on Allied four-engined bomber units. Also once can see figures which seem to point to another game bug.
Essentially I have listed the number of planes of each type which begin the game on-map on December 7th. I have also added the number of planes which arrive as replacements and individual reinforcements during the six months to 1st June 1942. I did not, however, account for the number of planes which arrive in reinforcement squadrons as I assumed that these reinforcement squadrons would draw planes from the replacement pool and, if insufficient planes were present in the replacement pool, would not be allowed to arrive, instead going into an "Organising" mode until sufficient planes were in the pool. This would mirror the mechanic governing Japanese air reinforcements.
Unfortunately several Allied plane types, notably the Wellington, Hurricane II, Kittyhawk I, Lysander I and Mohawk IV all have suffered losses significantly in excess of the number of planes of those types present on 7th December PLUS those arriving as replacements or individual reinforcements in the six months following.
If Allied reinforcement squadrons can appear irrespective of the replacement pool situation then that would be quite a significant bug... robbing the Japanese player of the ability to stave off such reinforcements by mounting a high tempo of operations in order to attrit Allied pool categories.
Of the four-engined bombers which should have arrived on-map it can be seen the B-17E, LB-30 and Wellington III numbers have been seriously hit with the result that it should prove difficult for Trey to mount four-engined bomber raids in overwhelming numbers in the future... He is definitely building up a significant four-engined bomber fleet in Irkutsk etc and we've discussed this. I think that it is stretching credulity to think that the Soviets would have provoked the Japanese in this way at this time but Trey seems to view it as a sort of covert support ( except it isn't covert). We have agreed to disagree with the provisos that:
1. These Soviet bases cannot be used to launch four-engined raids on the Japanese mainland until such time as the Soviet Union is attacked.
2. If I attack these bases with bombers/paratroops then the Soviet Union and Japan will be at war and will go to war without the previously agreed 1 month delay.
I don't, obviously, intend to attack at this stage but if those bombers remain based there then I certainly would be willing to attack with surprise at a later date.
As far as Allied twin-engined strength goes the B-26 Bs should have been cut down in size tremendously by the loss of 194 of their number as will the Blenheims and Hudsons although, to be fair, if the Allies are gaining free replacements via squadron reinforcements in a manner alien to the Japanese then the pools in these aircraft types could be significantly more healthy than I initially thought.
As far as Allied fighters go the P-40B, P-40E, Hurricane II and F4F-4 strengths have all been nicely whittled down with the result that my Zeroes and upcoming Tonys and Tojos should suffice to give me air supremacy in whatever theatre I choose until November 1942.
So, all in alll a very good situation. Allied four-engined bombers have taken very heavy losses, several types of twin-engined bombers are also similarly effected and fighter reserves of the most effective fighter types have also been quite reduced.
Its all going very much according to plan in the air.
I can't attach the word file so I'm just cutting and pasting. Hopefully the tables transfer relatively well.
At Start Arriving Lost Remaining
B-17 C 35 0 26 + 9
B-17 E 84 240 161 + 163
B-18 123 60 33 + 150
LB-30 0 330 143 + 189
Wellington 3 0 180 228 - 48
B-25 C 45 475 47 + 473
B-26 B 33 180 194 + 19
Beaufort I 0 90 16 + 74
Blenheim 75 480 524 + 31
Hudson I 144 120 122 + 142
Martin 139 58 30 92 - 4
Brewster 42 120 68 + 94
Buffalo I 77 120 198 - 1
CW-21 B 18 120 18 + 120
F2 A 36 210 12 + 234
F4F-3 66 120 30 + 156
F4F-4 0 540 250 + 270
Fulmar 0 120 37 + 83
Hawk 75A 18 120 18 + 120
Hurricane II 0 360 458 - 92
Kittyhawk I 0 150 205 - 55
Lysander I 16 60 132 - 56
Mohawk IV 0 80 146 - 66
P-36A 137 120 44 + 213
P-39D 39 250 15 + 274
P-40B 245 60 255 + 50
P-40E 65 240 276 + 29
Wirraway 101 330 170 + 261
SBD 132 1000 177 + 955
Swordfish 14 60 83 - 9
TBD 39 360 30 + 369
Vildebeest 40 60 108 - 8
C-47 60 690 5 + 745
Dakota I 0 180 148 + 32
Total Allied Aerial Losses total 5459 while Japanese losses total 3734. Obviously these losses favour the Japanese especially when one realises that a significant portion of Japanese losses have occurred in disposable transport, reconnaissance and floatplane units and amongst the less experienced bomber and fighter pilots.
In the Word attachment below you can see the results of the targetted culling of Allied force components and the special attention focussed on Allied four-engined bomber units. Also once can see figures which seem to point to another game bug.
Essentially I have listed the number of planes of each type which begin the game on-map on December 7th. I have also added the number of planes which arrive as replacements and individual reinforcements during the six months to 1st June 1942. I did not, however, account for the number of planes which arrive in reinforcement squadrons as I assumed that these reinforcement squadrons would draw planes from the replacement pool and, if insufficient planes were present in the replacement pool, would not be allowed to arrive, instead going into an "Organising" mode until sufficient planes were in the pool. This would mirror the mechanic governing Japanese air reinforcements.
Unfortunately several Allied plane types, notably the Wellington, Hurricane II, Kittyhawk I, Lysander I and Mohawk IV all have suffered losses significantly in excess of the number of planes of those types present on 7th December PLUS those arriving as replacements or individual reinforcements in the six months following.
If Allied reinforcement squadrons can appear irrespective of the replacement pool situation then that would be quite a significant bug... robbing the Japanese player of the ability to stave off such reinforcements by mounting a high tempo of operations in order to attrit Allied pool categories.
Of the four-engined bombers which should have arrived on-map it can be seen the B-17E, LB-30 and Wellington III numbers have been seriously hit with the result that it should prove difficult for Trey to mount four-engined bomber raids in overwhelming numbers in the future... He is definitely building up a significant four-engined bomber fleet in Irkutsk etc and we've discussed this. I think that it is stretching credulity to think that the Soviets would have provoked the Japanese in this way at this time but Trey seems to view it as a sort of covert support ( except it isn't covert). We have agreed to disagree with the provisos that:
1. These Soviet bases cannot be used to launch four-engined raids on the Japanese mainland until such time as the Soviet Union is attacked.
2. If I attack these bases with bombers/paratroops then the Soviet Union and Japan will be at war and will go to war without the previously agreed 1 month delay.
I don't, obviously, intend to attack at this stage but if those bombers remain based there then I certainly would be willing to attack with surprise at a later date.
As far as Allied twin-engined strength goes the B-26 Bs should have been cut down in size tremendously by the loss of 194 of their number as will the Blenheims and Hudsons although, to be fair, if the Allies are gaining free replacements via squadron reinforcements in a manner alien to the Japanese then the pools in these aircraft types could be significantly more healthy than I initially thought.
As far as Allied fighters go the P-40B, P-40E, Hurricane II and F4F-4 strengths have all been nicely whittled down with the result that my Zeroes and upcoming Tonys and Tojos should suffice to give me air supremacy in whatever theatre I choose until November 1942.
So, all in alll a very good situation. Allied four-engined bombers have taken very heavy losses, several types of twin-engined bombers are also similarly effected and fighter reserves of the most effective fighter types have also been quite reduced.
Its all going very much according to plan in the air.
I can't attach the word file so I'm just cutting and pasting. Hopefully the tables transfer relatively well.
At Start Arriving Lost Remaining
B-17 C 35 0 26 + 9
B-17 E 84 240 161 + 163
B-18 123 60 33 + 150
LB-30 0 330 143 + 189
Wellington 3 0 180 228 - 48
B-25 C 45 475 47 + 473
B-26 B 33 180 194 + 19
Beaufort I 0 90 16 + 74
Blenheim 75 480 524 + 31
Hudson I 144 120 122 + 142
Martin 139 58 30 92 - 4
Brewster 42 120 68 + 94
Buffalo I 77 120 198 - 1
CW-21 B 18 120 18 + 120
F2 A 36 210 12 + 234
F4F-3 66 120 30 + 156
F4F-4 0 540 250 + 270
Fulmar 0 120 37 + 83
Hawk 75A 18 120 18 + 120
Hurricane II 0 360 458 - 92
Kittyhawk I 0 150 205 - 55
Lysander I 16 60 132 - 56
Mohawk IV 0 80 146 - 66
P-36A 137 120 44 + 213
P-39D 39 250 15 + 274
P-40B 245 60 255 + 50
P-40E 65 240 276 + 29
Wirraway 101 330 170 + 261
SBD 132 1000 177 + 955
Swordfish 14 60 83 - 9
TBD 39 360 30 + 369
Vildebeest 40 60 108 - 8
C-47 60 690 5 + 745
Dakota I 0 180 148 + 32
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
Well, that's that settled then.
RE: 6 Months In: How much longer can Japan run rampant?
Plans:
Well, it all depends on karachi. With supplies and troops just magically appearing out of thin air despite the presence of hundreds of Bettys on naval attack, many hundreds of Sallys and Helens bombing the base every day, 10 Japanese BBs and over 16 CAs carrying out a rotating naval bombardment schedule and 200,000 troops backed by hundreds of tanks besieging the city it seems that Karachi just may prove impossible to have fall.
It may prove time to come to a gentleman's agreement about this and either:
a) allow the defenders of Karachi to move somewhere which doesn't benefit from this silly teleporting supply rule which practically guarantees them their survival or
b) ask trey if he would consider declaring Karachi an open city from which he can evacuate all troops to Australia or the US as soon as they arrive using guaranteed "safe convoy lanes" such that we can fight without teleporting supplies completely skewing the results.
I'm going to try one more major ground attack on Karachi in mid-June to assess the possibility of taking it by force and if that doesn't work then I think I'll ask to come to some sort of accomodation.
With the Karachi situation settled one way or the other I will then prepare my forces for the invasion of Northern Australia and later, if possible, Hawaii. My reasoning is that the rebuilding of my battleline will take me approximately 3 months in major repair yards. This means that I will be ready to go for Hawaii in November 1942 ( which should coincide nicely with Allied CV upgrades).
While I have an offensive halt for three months due to the state of my battleline my infantry can either be doing something or nothing. I prefer to have them do something so my plan is to send them to Northern Australia for a 2-3 month ground campaign ending with the capture of the Northern Australian bases and a bit of a thrust southward by expendable units.
Later, after the Hawaiian operation is concluded one way or the other it should prove eminently feasible to bring the majority of my forces back west to invade New Zealand by way of Noumea. I am confident of taking New Zealand as there are no urban hexes there and so that almost unbeatable bonus will be removed from play. The stage will then be set for a series of attacks aimed at removing Australia and the Soviet Union's major offensive potentials.
In the meantime though Trey is going to make major progress in the Aleutians... but he should beware of things going very well for him. What he takes now will discomfit me but will also prove to simply be POW camps in the making if things go against him... while I am going to drop a regiment at the little dot base south-east of Palmyra to eliminate an Allied base there. I expect that this island will hold an artillery regiment, a base force and possible a CD unit. I'm sending two PGs with the APs and expect many of them to be sunk. That's fine by me though. So long as the regiment gets ashore and survives the inevitable Allied counter-attacks I can supply it and give it time to rebuild its disabled squads before going on the offensive.
Back to the AAR for now though:
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 06/01/42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 1035 encounters mine field at Dutch Harbor (103,36)
Allied Ships
MSW Courtenay
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack near Adak Island at 98,36
Japanese Ships
SS I-20
Allied Ships
MSW Guysborough
MSW Caraquet
PG Moncton
PG Vancouver
AP McCawley
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Naval bombardment of Adak Island, at 98,36
Allied Ships
CA Chicago
CA Louisville
CA Northampton
CA Indianapolis
CA Portland
BB Mississippi
BB New Mexico
BB Idaho
BB Colorado
Japanese ground losses:
323 casualties reported
Airbase hits 2
Runway hits 7
Port hits 4
Port supply hits 16
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack near Adak Island at 98,36
Japanese Ships
SS I-20, hits 5
Allied Ships
MSW Guysborough
MSW Caraquet
PG Moncton
PG Vancouver
AP George F. Elliot
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 1040 encounters mine field at Adak Island (98,36)
TF 1040 troops unloading over beach at Adak Island, 98,36
Allied Ships
MSW Guysborough
MSW Caraquet
PG Moncton
Allied ground losses:
147 casualties reported
There are only something like 60 mines at Adak. It really isn't sufficient to expect much but hopefully a few MSWs or PGs will fall foul of the mines.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 10th Group Army, at 39,34
Japanese aircraft
Ki-27 Nate x 47
No Japanese losses
Allied ground losses:
14 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Karachi , at 21,3
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 13
Ki-46-II Dinah x 1
Allied aircraft
Mohawk IV x 3
P-40E Warhawk x 1
No Japanese losses
Allied aircraft losses
P-40E Warhawk: 1 destroyed
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Karachi , at 21,3
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 22
A6M3 Zero x 5
Ki-21 Sally x 112
Ki-49 Helen x 6
Ki-46-II Dinah x 5
Allied aircraft
Mohawk IV x 3
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21 Sally: 2 destroyed, 26 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
Mohawk IV: 3 destroyed
B-25C Mitchell: 10 destroyed
Dakota I: 3 destroyed
Beaufort V-IX: 5 destroyed
Hurricane II: 1 destroyed
PBY Catalina: 3 destroyed
Wellington III: 1 destroyed
Blenheim IV: 1 destroyed
P-40E Warhawk: 1 destroyed
Kittyhawk I: 1 destroyed
Allied ground losses:
101 casualties reported
Vehicles lost 1
Airbase hits 15
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 127
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Trimcomalee , at 15,25
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 9
Allied aircraft
SB-2c x 5
Japanese aircraft losses
G3M Nell: 1 destroyed
Ki-21 Sally: 1 destroyed
Allied aircraft losses
SB-2c: 1 destroyed, 1 damaged
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Koepang , at 28,77
Allied aircraft
Brewster 339D x 21
B-17E Fortress x 99
Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress: 5 damaged
Japanese ground losses:
507 casualties reported
Guns lost 13
Airbase hits 18
Airbase supply hits 7
Runway hits 155
I do believe the Allies might actually try something at Koepang. I happen to think this would really be rash but with his successes at Adak and Karachi Trey might just get overconfident. It is worth bearing in mind.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 1st Tank Regiment, at 36,25
Allied aircraft
SB-2c x 8
No Allied losses
Japanese ground losses:
14 casualties reported
Vehicles lost 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 120th USN Base Force, at 42,58
Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 86
D3A Val x 123
B5N Kate x 188
Ki-27 Nate x 156
Ki-51 Sonia x 23
Ki-15 Babs x 4
No Japanese losses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 71st Chinese Division, at 39,35
Japanese aircraft
Ki-27 Nate x 24
Ki-48 Lily x 95
No Japanese losses
Allied ground losses:
79 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Chungking
Japanese Bombardment attack
Attacking force 180527 troops, 2196 guns, 8 vehicles, Assault Value = 3447
Defending force 176097 troops, 1241 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 3854
Allied ground losses:
248 casualties reported
Guns lost 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at 23,47
Japanese Bombardment attack
Attacking force 5332 troops, 183 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 55
Defending force 1880 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 2
Allied ground losses:
14 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Adak Island
Allied Deliberate attack
Attacking force 4899 troops, 57 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 141
Defending force 260 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1
Allied max assault: 88 - adjusted assault: 90
Japanese max defense: 0 - adjusted defense: 1
Allied assault odds: 90 to 1 (fort level 0)
Allied forces CAPTURE Adak Island base !!!
Japanese ground losses:
705 casualties reported
And Adak falls. I got the required cadre of my engineers away first though.
Well, it all depends on karachi. With supplies and troops just magically appearing out of thin air despite the presence of hundreds of Bettys on naval attack, many hundreds of Sallys and Helens bombing the base every day, 10 Japanese BBs and over 16 CAs carrying out a rotating naval bombardment schedule and 200,000 troops backed by hundreds of tanks besieging the city it seems that Karachi just may prove impossible to have fall.
It may prove time to come to a gentleman's agreement about this and either:
a) allow the defenders of Karachi to move somewhere which doesn't benefit from this silly teleporting supply rule which practically guarantees them their survival or
b) ask trey if he would consider declaring Karachi an open city from which he can evacuate all troops to Australia or the US as soon as they arrive using guaranteed "safe convoy lanes" such that we can fight without teleporting supplies completely skewing the results.
I'm going to try one more major ground attack on Karachi in mid-June to assess the possibility of taking it by force and if that doesn't work then I think I'll ask to come to some sort of accomodation.
With the Karachi situation settled one way or the other I will then prepare my forces for the invasion of Northern Australia and later, if possible, Hawaii. My reasoning is that the rebuilding of my battleline will take me approximately 3 months in major repair yards. This means that I will be ready to go for Hawaii in November 1942 ( which should coincide nicely with Allied CV upgrades).
While I have an offensive halt for three months due to the state of my battleline my infantry can either be doing something or nothing. I prefer to have them do something so my plan is to send them to Northern Australia for a 2-3 month ground campaign ending with the capture of the Northern Australian bases and a bit of a thrust southward by expendable units.
Later, after the Hawaiian operation is concluded one way or the other it should prove eminently feasible to bring the majority of my forces back west to invade New Zealand by way of Noumea. I am confident of taking New Zealand as there are no urban hexes there and so that almost unbeatable bonus will be removed from play. The stage will then be set for a series of attacks aimed at removing Australia and the Soviet Union's major offensive potentials.
In the meantime though Trey is going to make major progress in the Aleutians... but he should beware of things going very well for him. What he takes now will discomfit me but will also prove to simply be POW camps in the making if things go against him... while I am going to drop a regiment at the little dot base south-east of Palmyra to eliminate an Allied base there. I expect that this island will hold an artillery regiment, a base force and possible a CD unit. I'm sending two PGs with the APs and expect many of them to be sunk. That's fine by me though. So long as the regiment gets ashore and survives the inevitable Allied counter-attacks I can supply it and give it time to rebuild its disabled squads before going on the offensive.
Back to the AAR for now though:
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 06/01/42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 1035 encounters mine field at Dutch Harbor (103,36)
Allied Ships
MSW Courtenay
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack near Adak Island at 98,36
Japanese Ships
SS I-20
Allied Ships
MSW Guysborough
MSW Caraquet
PG Moncton
PG Vancouver
AP McCawley
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Naval bombardment of Adak Island, at 98,36
Allied Ships
CA Chicago
CA Louisville
CA Northampton
CA Indianapolis
CA Portland
BB Mississippi
BB New Mexico
BB Idaho
BB Colorado
Japanese ground losses:
323 casualties reported
Airbase hits 2
Runway hits 7
Port hits 4
Port supply hits 16
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack near Adak Island at 98,36
Japanese Ships
SS I-20, hits 5
Allied Ships
MSW Guysborough
MSW Caraquet
PG Moncton
PG Vancouver
AP George F. Elliot
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 1040 encounters mine field at Adak Island (98,36)
TF 1040 troops unloading over beach at Adak Island, 98,36
Allied Ships
MSW Guysborough
MSW Caraquet
PG Moncton
Allied ground losses:
147 casualties reported
There are only something like 60 mines at Adak. It really isn't sufficient to expect much but hopefully a few MSWs or PGs will fall foul of the mines.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 10th Group Army, at 39,34
Japanese aircraft
Ki-27 Nate x 47
No Japanese losses
Allied ground losses:
14 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Karachi , at 21,3
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 13
Ki-46-II Dinah x 1
Allied aircraft
Mohawk IV x 3
P-40E Warhawk x 1
No Japanese losses
Allied aircraft losses
P-40E Warhawk: 1 destroyed
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Karachi , at 21,3
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 22
A6M3 Zero x 5
Ki-21 Sally x 112
Ki-49 Helen x 6
Ki-46-II Dinah x 5
Allied aircraft
Mohawk IV x 3
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21 Sally: 2 destroyed, 26 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
Mohawk IV: 3 destroyed
B-25C Mitchell: 10 destroyed
Dakota I: 3 destroyed
Beaufort V-IX: 5 destroyed
Hurricane II: 1 destroyed
PBY Catalina: 3 destroyed
Wellington III: 1 destroyed
Blenheim IV: 1 destroyed
P-40E Warhawk: 1 destroyed
Kittyhawk I: 1 destroyed
Allied ground losses:
101 casualties reported
Vehicles lost 1
Airbase hits 15
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 127
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Trimcomalee , at 15,25
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 9
Allied aircraft
SB-2c x 5
Japanese aircraft losses
G3M Nell: 1 destroyed
Ki-21 Sally: 1 destroyed
Allied aircraft losses
SB-2c: 1 destroyed, 1 damaged
Airbase supply hits 1
Runway hits 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Koepang , at 28,77
Allied aircraft
Brewster 339D x 21
B-17E Fortress x 99
Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress: 5 damaged
Japanese ground losses:
507 casualties reported
Guns lost 13
Airbase hits 18
Airbase supply hits 7
Runway hits 155
I do believe the Allies might actually try something at Koepang. I happen to think this would really be rash but with his successes at Adak and Karachi Trey might just get overconfident. It is worth bearing in mind.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 1st Tank Regiment, at 36,25
Allied aircraft
SB-2c x 8
No Allied losses
Japanese ground losses:
14 casualties reported
Vehicles lost 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 120th USN Base Force, at 42,58
Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 86
D3A Val x 123
B5N Kate x 188
Ki-27 Nate x 156
Ki-51 Sonia x 23
Ki-15 Babs x 4
No Japanese losses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 71st Chinese Division, at 39,35
Japanese aircraft
Ki-27 Nate x 24
Ki-48 Lily x 95
No Japanese losses
Allied ground losses:
79 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Chungking
Japanese Bombardment attack
Attacking force 180527 troops, 2196 guns, 8 vehicles, Assault Value = 3447
Defending force 176097 troops, 1241 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 3854
Allied ground losses:
248 casualties reported
Guns lost 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at 23,47
Japanese Bombardment attack
Attacking force 5332 troops, 183 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 55
Defending force 1880 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 2
Allied ground losses:
14 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Adak Island
Allied Deliberate attack
Attacking force 4899 troops, 57 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 141
Defending force 260 troops, 0 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1
Allied max assault: 88 - adjusted assault: 90
Japanese max defense: 0 - adjusted defense: 1
Allied assault odds: 90 to 1 (fort level 0)
Allied forces CAPTURE Adak Island base !!!
Japanese ground losses:
705 casualties reported
And Adak falls. I got the required cadre of my engineers away first though.
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
Well, that's that settled then.
-
Capt. Harlock
- Posts: 5379
- Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Los Angeles
- Contact:
RE: 6 Months In: How much longer can Japan run rampant?
Granted, those are impressive losses that you've inflicted, but I'm not convinced the situation is entirely favorable to the Japanese. Several key aircraft types, including the B-17E and even more the SBD, are increasing rather than decreasing with time. Given the way the Allies are able to out-produce the Japanese, the loss ratios would indicate the Japanese will run short of aircraft first. Vital point: are the losses of support aircraft draining engine production?
Civil war? What does that mean? Is there any foreign war? Isn't every war fought between men, between brothers?
--Victor Hugo
--Victor Hugo
RE: 6 Months In: How much longer can Japan run rampant?
Nemo my tuppence worth is thats always been the case and it isnt a bug because those sqns are not like Japanese Sqns where they are coming from production and need to filled up they are primarily off map reinforcements i.e. redeployments from the ME, Iraq, East Coast etc of whole sqns and Groups
I suppose you could set it up like Japanese but then you would need to increase the pools and growth rates to offset it and that would have longer term impacts as you could not turn off this 'increased production' you would end up with massive allied pools to early.
A good example is the Hurricane and Wellington Sqns the allies get in early 42 where these were sqns primarily redeployed straight from the Desert Aircraft and all or from convoys en route to the Desert.
I think PDU make this more of an issue than non PDU as allies can concentrate their best types at the Schwertpunk more easy i.e. downgrade out of the way sqns to Bolos and mass the good types where they are needed.
Re Russia I must admit using Russia to transfer aircraft is to me personally quite gamey the Soviets would not have provoked the Japanese in this way (although if India is really up the creek I suppose Churchill and Roosevelt could have made it a precondition to the Arctic convoys....had they really pushed the issue who know what could have happened)
Interesting analysis
I suppose you could set it up like Japanese but then you would need to increase the pools and growth rates to offset it and that would have longer term impacts as you could not turn off this 'increased production' you would end up with massive allied pools to early.
A good example is the Hurricane and Wellington Sqns the allies get in early 42 where these were sqns primarily redeployed straight from the Desert Aircraft and all or from convoys en route to the Desert.
I think PDU make this more of an issue than non PDU as allies can concentrate their best types at the Schwertpunk more easy i.e. downgrade out of the way sqns to Bolos and mass the good types where they are needed.
Re Russia I must admit using Russia to transfer aircraft is to me personally quite gamey the Soviets would not have provoked the Japanese in this way (although if India is really up the creek I suppose Churchill and Roosevelt could have made it a precondition to the Arctic convoys....had they really pushed the issue who know what could have happened)
Interesting analysis
RE: 6 Months In: How much longer can Japan run rampant?
AFTER ACTION REPORTS FOR 06/02/42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 1035 encounters mine field at Dutch Harbor (103,36)
Allied Ships
MSW Courtenay
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack at 99,36
Japanese Ships
SS I-20
Allied Ships
DMS Perry
DMS Hopkins
DMS Southard
CA Portland
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 1007 encounters mine field at Adak Island (98,36)
Allied Ships
SS Narwhal, and is sunk
DMS Perry
DMS Hopkins
DMS Southard
CA Chicago, Mine hits 1
A bleedover from some other sub=phase reports that Narwhal has succumbed to her wounds. CA Chicago also hits a mine but is almost undamaged. Unfortunately I didn't realise that the mines I was placing at Adak and Amchitka were all Type 4s and, as such, are almost completely ineffective against anything tougher than a destroyer. [8|] Dumb move on my part.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've also decided to, once and for all, remove Warspite from the situation. I ordered massed port attacks from my army and navy level bombers.
Day Air attack on Karachi , at 21,3
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 128
A6M3 Zero x 15
Ki-21 Sally x 162
Ki-49 Helen x 6
Ki-46-II Dinah x 7
Allied aircraft
Buffalo I x 1
Kittyhawk I x 3
Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 1 damaged
A6M3 Zero: 2 destroyed
Ki-21 Sally: 6 destroyed, 33 damaged
Ki-49 Helen: 1 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
Buffalo I: 1 destroyed
Kittyhawk I: 3 destroyed
Allied Ships
BB Warspite, Bomb hits 59, on fire, heavy damage
SS KXII, Bomb hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
AP Dardanus, Bomb hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
SS KXI, Bomb hits 1, on fire
SS S-36, Bomb hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
Allied ground losses:
85 casualties reported
Port hits 14
Port supply hits 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Karachi , at 21,3
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 13
G3M Nell x 40
G4M1 Betty x 147
Ki-46-II Dinah x 7
Japanese aircraft losses
G3M Nell: 7 destroyed, 26 damaged
G4M1 Betty: 18 destroyed, 80 damaged
Ki-46-II Dinah: 1 damaged
Allied Ships
BB Warspite, Bomb hits 27, on fire, heavy damage
AP Dardanus, Bomb hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
SS KXI, Bomb hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
Allied ground losses:
102 casualties reported
Guns lost 1
Port hits 7
Port fuel hits 2
Port supply hits 1
Aircraft Attacking:
13 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
4 x G3M Nell launching torpedoes at 200 feet
3 x G3M Nell launching torpedoes at 200 feet
9 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
7 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
13 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
7 x G3M Nell launching torpedoes at 200 feet
2 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
7 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
15 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
2 x G3M Nell launching torpedoes at 200 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
3 x G3M Nell bombing at 6000 feet
4 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
4 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
4 x G3M Nell launching torpedoes at 200 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
7 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
4 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
2 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
3 x G3M Nell bombing at 6000 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
2 x G3M Nell bombing at 6000 feet
2 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 6000 feet
2 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
4 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 6000 feet
2 x G3M Nell launching torpedoes at 200 feet
2 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 6000 feet
6 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 6000 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 6000 feet
2 x G3M Nell launching torpedoes at 200 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
2 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
1 x G3M Nell launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Another probably bug. With that many naval bombers launching torpedoes it seems unlikely that not a single torpedo would hit especially when we are asked to believe that the 22 bombers which dropped bombs scored 29 hits.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Colombo , at 14,24
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 12
Ki-21 Sally x 26
Ki-49 Helen x 19
Allied aircraft
no flights
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21 Sally: 3 damaged
Ki-49 Helen: 3 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
SB-2c: 1 destroyed
Wirraway: 4 destroyed
Allied ground losses:
28 casualties reported
Airbase hits 6
Airbase supply hits 6
Runway hits 53
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Koepang , at 28,77
Allied aircraft
Brewster 339D x 21
B-17E Fortress x 94
Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress: 2 damaged
Japanese ground losses:
316 casualties reported
Guns lost 3
Airbase hits 5
Airbase supply hits 8
Runway hits 145
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 1st Tank Regiment, at 36,25
Allied aircraft
SB-2c x 8
No Allied losses
Japanese ground losses:
14 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 120th USN Base Force, at 42,58
Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 86
D3A Val x 162
B5N Kate x 188
Ki-27 Nate x 165
Ki-51 Sonia x 25
Ki-15 Babs x 4
No Japanese losses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 71st Chinese Division, at 39,35
Japanese aircraft
Ki-27 Nate x 24
Ki-48 Lily x 77
No Japanese losses
Allied ground losses:
45 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack at 93,61
Japanese Ships
AK Tokusima Maru
PC Shimushu
Allied Ships
SS Flying Fish
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack at 33,76
Japanese Ships
PG Kozan Maru
PG Aso Maru
MSW W.13
MSW W.3
Allied Ships
SS Grayling
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Chungking
Japanese Bombardment attack
Attacking force 180633 troops, 2200 guns, 8 vehicles, Assault Value = 3473
Defending force 176046 troops, 1236 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 3852
Allied ground losses:
180 casualties reported
At the end of the day Warspite was reported as sunk as were three of the submarines in harbour with her. Excellent news!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 1035 encounters mine field at Dutch Harbor (103,36)
Allied Ships
MSW Courtenay
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack at 99,36
Japanese Ships
SS I-20
Allied Ships
DMS Perry
DMS Hopkins
DMS Southard
CA Portland
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TF 1007 encounters mine field at Adak Island (98,36)
Allied Ships
SS Narwhal, and is sunk
DMS Perry
DMS Hopkins
DMS Southard
CA Chicago, Mine hits 1
A bleedover from some other sub=phase reports that Narwhal has succumbed to her wounds. CA Chicago also hits a mine but is almost undamaged. Unfortunately I didn't realise that the mines I was placing at Adak and Amchitka were all Type 4s and, as such, are almost completely ineffective against anything tougher than a destroyer. [8|] Dumb move on my part.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've also decided to, once and for all, remove Warspite from the situation. I ordered massed port attacks from my army and navy level bombers.
Day Air attack on Karachi , at 21,3
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 128
A6M3 Zero x 15
Ki-21 Sally x 162
Ki-49 Helen x 6
Ki-46-II Dinah x 7
Allied aircraft
Buffalo I x 1
Kittyhawk I x 3
Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 1 damaged
A6M3 Zero: 2 destroyed
Ki-21 Sally: 6 destroyed, 33 damaged
Ki-49 Helen: 1 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
Buffalo I: 1 destroyed
Kittyhawk I: 3 destroyed
Allied Ships
BB Warspite, Bomb hits 59, on fire, heavy damage
SS KXII, Bomb hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
AP Dardanus, Bomb hits 2, on fire, heavy damage
SS KXI, Bomb hits 1, on fire
SS S-36, Bomb hits 3, on fire, heavy damage
Allied ground losses:
85 casualties reported
Port hits 14
Port supply hits 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Karachi , at 21,3
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 13
G3M Nell x 40
G4M1 Betty x 147
Ki-46-II Dinah x 7
Japanese aircraft losses
G3M Nell: 7 destroyed, 26 damaged
G4M1 Betty: 18 destroyed, 80 damaged
Ki-46-II Dinah: 1 damaged
Allied Ships
BB Warspite, Bomb hits 27, on fire, heavy damage
AP Dardanus, Bomb hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
SS KXI, Bomb hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
Allied ground losses:
102 casualties reported
Guns lost 1
Port hits 7
Port fuel hits 2
Port supply hits 1
Aircraft Attacking:
13 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
4 x G3M Nell launching torpedoes at 200 feet
3 x G3M Nell launching torpedoes at 200 feet
9 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
7 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
13 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
7 x G3M Nell launching torpedoes at 200 feet
2 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
7 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
15 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
2 x G3M Nell launching torpedoes at 200 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
3 x G3M Nell bombing at 6000 feet
4 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
4 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
4 x G3M Nell launching torpedoes at 200 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
7 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
4 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
2 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
3 x G3M Nell bombing at 6000 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
2 x G3M Nell bombing at 6000 feet
2 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 6000 feet
2 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
4 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 6000 feet
2 x G3M Nell launching torpedoes at 200 feet
2 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 6000 feet
6 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 6000 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty bombing at 6000 feet
2 x G3M Nell launching torpedoes at 200 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
2 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
3 x G4M1 Betty launching torpedoes at 200 feet
1 x G3M Nell launching torpedoes at 200 feet
Another probably bug. With that many naval bombers launching torpedoes it seems unlikely that not a single torpedo would hit especially when we are asked to believe that the 22 bombers which dropped bombs scored 29 hits.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Colombo , at 14,24
Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 12
Ki-21 Sally x 26
Ki-49 Helen x 19
Allied aircraft
no flights
Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-21 Sally: 3 damaged
Ki-49 Helen: 3 damaged
Allied aircraft losses
SB-2c: 1 destroyed
Wirraway: 4 destroyed
Allied ground losses:
28 casualties reported
Airbase hits 6
Airbase supply hits 6
Runway hits 53
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on Koepang , at 28,77
Allied aircraft
Brewster 339D x 21
B-17E Fortress x 94
Allied aircraft losses
B-17E Fortress: 2 damaged
Japanese ground losses:
316 casualties reported
Guns lost 3
Airbase hits 5
Airbase supply hits 8
Runway hits 145
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 1st Tank Regiment, at 36,25
Allied aircraft
SB-2c x 8
No Allied losses
Japanese ground losses:
14 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 120th USN Base Force, at 42,58
Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 86
D3A Val x 162
B5N Kate x 188
Ki-27 Nate x 165
Ki-51 Sonia x 25
Ki-15 Babs x 4
No Japanese losses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Air attack on 71st Chinese Division, at 39,35
Japanese aircraft
Ki-27 Nate x 24
Ki-48 Lily x 77
No Japanese losses
Allied ground losses:
45 casualties reported
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub attack at 93,61
Japanese Ships
AK Tokusima Maru
PC Shimushu
Allied Ships
SS Flying Fish
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASW attack at 33,76
Japanese Ships
PG Kozan Maru
PG Aso Maru
MSW W.13
MSW W.3
Allied Ships
SS Grayling
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ground combat at Chungking
Japanese Bombardment attack
Attacking force 180633 troops, 2200 guns, 8 vehicles, Assault Value = 3473
Defending force 176046 troops, 1236 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 3852
Allied ground losses:
180 casualties reported
At the end of the day Warspite was reported as sunk as were three of the submarines in harbour with her. Excellent news!
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
Well, that's that settled then.