Shattered Vow

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
crsutton
Posts: 9590
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: To Good to be True!

Post by crsutton »

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Thanks for the clarification - and I apologize for generating a flurry of comments based upon my misunderstanding of the written word.  And to think I make a living by working with the written word...

I haven't kept detailed records of training, but my unscientific impression is that squadron training is better and faster than it was before.  IE, instead of it taking 27 light years for a B-24 squadron to increase from 25% to 32% experience level, now it takes a much shorter period of time, perhaps a month or two (a guesstimate).

I have had a multitutde of squadrons training for the entire game with relatively little progress.  Glaciation goes faster.  But I suppose that's the nature of the beast - we're one year into the war, so how much SHOULD pilot experience increase over a period of one year if the squadron is set at 40% training?


I have noticed post patch that training in a specific area, that area will grow much faster than overall experience. For example, training pilots on escort, I now have many pilots with overall exp in the 40s but air combat exp in the 50s and low 60s. Interesting. But it is obvious that units set to train in a specific skill can gain experience in that skill very fast now. My only concern is that this may favor the Japanese player too much as if it works the same way for them, they should be able to keep up a well trained core of experienced pilots well into the game. One of the most important aspects of them game is the overall drain on Japanese pilot quality. If this can be bypassed then it can hurt the game. Time will tell

I want the Japanese player to be able to train up pilots but it should never be as easy for them to do as the Allies.
I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by Canoerebel »

ORIGINAL: crsutton
ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

NO USSHENRICO OR CRIMGUY, please..





Have you loaded up a 'transport' TF with a couple of crummy xAKLs and about 20 ASW units and gone trolling for subs? Pump up the transport ASW rating to 50 or so and see what happens with his detected subs when the attack one of your merchants. I wonder if the artificial cap on 4 ship ASW hunter-killer groups in the game is underestimating the efficacy of such units IRL.

Sorry guys, as an Allied player I have sympathy with the ASW woes and am searching for solutions, but I consider this move extremely gamey. If my opponent does it, I ask them to stop. I especially disliked it in WITP. So, make sure you discuss this tactic with your opponent before doing it.

Currently I have one TF composed of an AK and a variety of ASW ships - some DDs, AMs, and SCs. This TF is operating off the West Coast. At one point I had two of these operating for about a week.

I fail to see how this can be considered gamey. It's a legit tactic, hasn't given me a single kill yet, and was implemented only after I had tried a zillion other tactics including going to the extreme of disbanding all my transports into ports worldwide. Japanese subs were wreaking havoc and still are. Allied ASW is completely neutered (and Japanese ASW is probably in the same shape, I'm sure).

And this strategem is somehow gamey?

I don't see it.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24648
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by Chickenboy »

ORIGINAL: crsutton

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

NO USSHENRICO OR CRIMGUY, please.

.
.
.
.





Have you loaded up a 'transport' TF with a couple of crummy xAKLs and about 20 ASW units and gone trolling for subs? Pump up the transport ASW rating to 50 or so and see what happens with his detected subs when the attack one of your merchants. I wonder if the artificial cap on 4 ship ASW hunter-killer groups in the game is underestimating the efficacy of such units IRL.

Sorry guys, as an Allied player I have sympathy with the ASW woes and am searching for solutions, but I consider this move extremely gamey. If my opponent does it, I ask them to stop. I especially disliked it in WITP. So, make sure you discuss this tactic with your opponent before doing it.


@ crsutton,

I agree with Canoerebel. If your 'search for solutions' has included standing down all of your allied submarine PBEM efforts pending 'fix' of the problem, then I salute you for staying your hand. Particularly in the presence of clear evidence that the system needs adjustments to be fair.

Not all PBEM partners have been as responsive when told repeatedly that something is amiss. Some have essentially ignored these problems and continued to twist the knife in the wound. For these situations, there are three options: 1. Quit altogether or suspend the game pending patch 'fix'. 2. Continue complaining and hoping that partner stays his hand or 3. Try to find a workaround. I submit that this effort is a creative attempt at #3.
Image
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by Canoerebel »

12/06/42 to 12/15/42
 
China:  The Japanese have crossed the river to besiege the key town of Changteh.  I cannot afford to lose this battle - to do so would mean Changhsa's downfall.  Fortunately, I had a pretty good hunch Miller was looking this way.  The base has six forts and the two sides are evenly matched with about 3500 AV.  I have more troops on the way, as does Miller I'm sure.  The initial Japanese river crossing didn't go well for them, but now they're across and have begun daily bombardments.  There are currently five artillery units present and the bombardments are doing no more than light damage.

NoPac:  I have about 3000 AV sitting in Seattle fully prepped for the Kuriles.  I have got to make a decision quickly as to whether I really intend to invade come mid-43.  If not, I need to switch prep and get these guys down to Oz.  This is a critical decision with war-long ramifications, so it's a tough one to make.

CenPac:  Japanese subs are picking off merchants at Midway, but the merchants are getting supplies ashore.  I think Miller will be back.  A sub at Palmyra picked off two AKs.  I wouldn't be surprised if Miller took a shot at Canton Island, but no sign of that happening yet.

SoPac:  Japanese subs have imposed a blockade on my efforts to get supplies to Vanua Lava, Ndeni and other islands north of Luganville.  I need more base forces here to permit me to base enough aircraft to rule the skies.  Reinforcements are on the way, but it will be awhile before they arrive.

SWPac:  The weird little war continues in which the Allies are reinforcing and supplying Horn Island and Merauke and building those bases without opposition form the enemy. I'm not even sure Miller is aware of what's going on there. Milller sent a fast transport convoy to Port Moresby.  I was tempted to interdict using a stout surface combat TF from Townsville, includng Prince of Wales, but I was afraid Miller was dangling bait in hopes that I would do just that; then he might swing the KB between PM and Townsville and wreak havoc. Figuring that he was also worried about his shipping and would have all available fighters flying LRCAP, I decided to instead hit the airfield at Milne Bay.  More than 100 heavy bombers from Oz clobbered the field on 10th, destroying 33 aircraft on the ground.  This was a satisfying victory.  At the same time, there was no appearance by the KB and Miller accomplished his resupply without opposition.  Pretty soon the big airfields in Northern Oz (and eventually Merauke) will allow the Allies to control the skies over New Guinea and as far north as the Rabaul area.

Burma/India:  The Allies occassionally target Akyab for big bombing raids without opposition.  The base is garrisoned by 20 Japanese units.  The Allies have about 2,500 AV at Cox's Bazaar that will advance sooner or later.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
JeffroK
Posts: 6435
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by JeffroK »

IMHO, you have survived the danger period, Miller has missed the period that the IJN reigns supreme (maybe you had a little to do with it[8D]), now he has to be a lot more careful as your powers grow & grow.

Keep up the illusion of multiple threats, make him do the running around and chew up his Fuel.

Use your recce assets to pick his weak spots, with variable sacking limits you can arrange quick hits and then remove the excess troops, a defender cant do this (unless you sucker him into a false threat)

When you move from Akyab, its just as easy to move into Central Burma as it is to push toward Prome. (Also the IJA can do this, protect your flank.)

If yo are still thinking of a Timor approach, have a look at some of the small islands close by, many have their airbases at 0(4) or 0(5), maybe isolate Timor and work around it.

Thanks for tossing in the chastity, your AAR has probably caused more changes to the game than any other.
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9902
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by ny59giants »

The big question is what your main thrust will be for 1943?? Until you decide that simple question, then not much else matters. 
[center]Image[/center]
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by Canoerebel »

12/16/42 to 12/19/42
 
Long-Range Planning:  After much mulling over of options, the Allies have decided on a course of action for 1943.  There will be two main theaters of action - seizing and building bases in the New Guinea area, mostly the island bases between NG and Timor.  From there, the Allies will move west with major targets being islands like Timor, Flores, and the Celebes.  Since there are a multitude of potential bases in this region, I don't anticipate a need to make major contested invasions.  Therefore, I have decided I don't really need to requisition the stack of troops at Seattle.  Instead, these troops will remain in place.  If I am successful in drawing Miller's full attention to SWPac, I plan to proceed with an invasion of the Kuriles.  All ground troops are fully prepped and I have most of the ships already stationed at Seattle.  I'll move my carriers to Seattle, also, since LBA should be sufficient for the SWPac operations.
 
NoPac:  Quiet here.  I haven't gotten any good Kuriles SigInt recently, but Onnekotan Jima still doesn't have an airfield and Paramushiro is still at level four.
 
CenPac:  I'm busy sending small convoys to Midway, and Miller's subs are busy sinking them.  On the 19th, I-28 got an AK there.  I am very worried about Midway, not because the Japs really need it but because it controls a vast swath of ocean.  If he takes it then it pushes the "starting point" for the Allies all the way back to Pearl.  So the Japs should take Midway not because of what it does for them, but what it does to the Allies.
 
SoPac:  As we near 1943, I'll have to begin considering drawing down the garrisons at Suva, Pago Pago, and Noumea for use elsewhere.  I've already done that at Auckland.
 
SwPac:  The Allied operations at Horn Island and Merauke continue unimpeded.  I believe Miller is focusing on fast transport convoys to Port Moresby and hasn't picked up on the Allied moves in this region.  Fuel is very short in Australia.  Bombers from Darwin irregularly hit either Koepang and Lautem.  Miller hasn't built up either base and the garrisons are weak.  This comes as a big surprise considering what happened to him on Timor in our WitP game.
 
Burma/India:  The big concentration of bombers at Calcutta/Diamond Harbor hit Schwebo on the 18th and 19th and will hit Akyab over the next two days.  I think the Allied army at Cox's Bazaar will be ready to advance on Akyab within a weak.  If the Allies can control the air space over Akyab, they should win the battle eventually.  If the Japanese wrest control of the air space, the Allies will have to retreat.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
JeffroK
Posts: 6435
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by JeffroK »

CenPac:  I'm busy sending small convoys to Midway, and Miller's subs are busy sinking them.  On the 19th, I-28 got an AK there.  I am very worried about Midway, not because the Japs really need it but because it controls a vast swath of ocean.  If he takes it then it pushes the "starting point" for the Allies all the way back to Pearl.  So the Japs should take Midway not because of what it does for them, but what it does to the Allies.

Have you developed either Laysan or FF Shoals??

If yes, can you fly in some supplies, its only penny packets but it helps.
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by Canoerebel »

A Seabee unit has been working at French Frigate for several months now, but I think it will be another year before it reaches level one port.  IE, by the time I can use it, French Frigage will probably be strategically irrelevant.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
JeffroK
Posts: 6435
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by JeffroK »

Yeah, big problem in bringing those 0(0) bases into use.

Maybe having Miller so interested in Midway will keep his attention from other ventures.

Does japanese intel work like WITP, and you can have some West Coast formations prep for Midway??
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by Canoerebel »

Just about all the combat units I have on the West Coast are at Seattle and prepped for the Kuriles.  I do have a Marine 'chutes battalion at Pearl fully prepped for Midway.  I just pulled the 'chutes out of Midway to ease the supply crisis a bit since I am already over the garrison limit.  I am considering withdrawing the base force and AA unit and re-inserting the 'chutes to maximize defensive AV.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
crsutton
Posts: 9590
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by crsutton »

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
ORIGINAL: crsutton
ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

NO USSHENRICO OR CRIMGUY, please..





Have you loaded up a 'transport' TF with a couple of crummy xAKLs and about 20 ASW units and gone trolling for subs? Pump up the transport ASW rating to 50 or so and see what happens with his detected subs when the attack one of your merchants. I wonder if the artificial cap on 4 ship ASW hunter-killer groups in the game is underestimating the efficacy of such units IRL.

Sorry guys, as an Allied player I have sympathy with the ASW woes and am searching for solutions, but I consider this move extremely gamey. If my opponent does it, I ask them to stop. I especially disliked it in WITP. So, make sure you discuss this tactic with your opponent before doing it.

Currently I have one TF composed of an AK and a variety of ASW ships - some DDs, AMs, and SCs. This TF is operating off the West Coast. At one point I had two of these operating for about a week.

I fail to see how this can be considered gamey. It's a legit tactic, hasn't given me a single kill yet, and was implemented only after I had tried a zillion other tactics including going to the extreme of disbanding all my transports into ports worldwide. Japanese subs were wreaking havoc and still are. Allied ASW is completely neutered (and Japanese ASW is probably in the same shape, I'm sure).

And this strategem is somehow gamey?

I don't see it.


Well, the point I am making is that in WITP this tactic was murder on Allied subs. It is too early to tell if that is the same thing in AE, but I certainly would be unhappy if my opponents were doing it (especially if it works). You got a good relationship with Miller. Why not bring it up with him?
I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24648
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by Chickenboy »

ORIGINAL: JeffK

Yeah, big problem in bringing those 0(0) bases into use.

Maybe having Miller so interested in Midway will keep his attention from other ventures.

Does japanese intel work like WITP, and you can have some West Coast formations prep for Midway??
Japanese intel (signals intel) is Sierra Hotel India Tango in AE. I would kill for the allied SigInt capabilities. Very doubtful that any preparation targets will be detected.
Image
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by Canoerebel »

crsutton:  The tactic isn't murder in AE as best I can tell.  In fact, it isn't even a gentle back rub.  As noted previously, I've used two "mock" transport TFs loaded with ASW platforms - one I used for about a week, the other has been in use continuously for a month or two of game time.  I don't believe either TF ever managed to bumble into a Japanese sub, and I know neither has actually launched any attacks against the enemy.

Chickenboy:  I enjoy the SigInt feature of the game, appreciate what it's designed to do, and recognize the advantage the Allies have over the Japanese.  I just wish the Allies got some SigInt about the location of Japanese carriers.  I think the Allies had such information fairly regularly in the real war and, of course, it helped the Allies tremendously.  I think Allied players would be a little more aggressive, and more inclined to use Allied carriers in small groups as was done in the real, if we occasionally knew some of the Japanese carriers were elsewhere. In this game, for instance, if I'd had SigInt that a few Japanese fleet carriers were at, say, Truk back in late October, I would have proceeded with the Kuriles invasion.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by Canoerebel »

12/20/42 to 12/27/42
 
Burma:  An Allied army is departing Cox's Bazaar and moving on Akyab, which has something like 20 Japanese units.  Via email, Miller says the Allies have air supremacy.  If he really believes that he may elect to withdraw from Akyab.  But I don't think he really believes that.  I have moved more fighter squadrons forward from Chittagong to Cox'x.
 
China:  Miller appears to be drawing down his Changsha stack in order to shift more troops to Chengtah (or perhaps they are going elsewhere).  The Chinese, however, have about 1200 AV that will arrive at Chengtah in less than a week.  With six forts and the wooded hex and the ability to call on reinforcements from nearby Changsha, I'm pretty confident Miller isn't going to win this particular battle.
 
NoPac:  Just received SigInt that Paramushiro garrison is 5,762 - roughly the same as it's been for the past many months.  I'm anxious to see whether Miller reinforces once winter draws to a close.  At some point, I need to move the bulk of my invasion force to Alaska so that I'll be ready to move quickly if and when the KB makes an appearance in the southern seas.
 
CenPac:  I-28 got an AK at Midway; I'm having a heck of a time getting supplies to this base.  Mines and ASW aren't doing a thing to help.  French Frigate port just went to level one (it seemed like it jumped from 5% to 100% in just a few weeks - somethng I can't explain.  It had been going so agonizlingly slowly that I had stopped checking.  Then - voila! - it becomes a port.  A watched pot...).  Now I'll work on the airfield.
 
SoPac:  I-6 got a TK at Tahiti - a legit sinking since the tanker took three torpedoes.  Once again, though, it's frustrating to see Japanese subs operating with impunity in major Allied bases protected by ASW.  My ASW doens't do a thing.  Sub Peto sank a Japanese DD near Gasmata.
 
SWPac:  Lots going on here.  Miller has a bunch of TFs at Milne Bay - could be cover for supplies, or could be something else.  Meanwhile, Allied TFs continue to move between Oz and Horn Island/Merauke without opposition.  I am so delighted by this state of affairs that I've held back on using my 4EB and powerful surface combat ships for fear of drawing the KB this way.  A Seabee unit has unloaded at one of the nice islands north of Darwin (Samaluke or something like that).  Even though this is a level zero airfield at the moment, transports from Darwin are able to fly in supply (but not troops).  If I can get this base up and running and secure, the Japanese are suddenly going to have major security issues at Timor and Ambon.  I have moved a small DD/CL TF from Perth to Darwin. 
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
ny59giants
Posts: 9902
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:02 pm

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by ny59giants »

I-6 got a TK at Tahiti - a legit sinking since the tanker took three torpedoes. Once again, though, it's frustrating to see Japanese subs operating with impunity in major Allied bases protected by ASW. My ASW doens't do a thing. Sub Peto sank a Japanese DD near Gasmata.

What are the experience levels of your pilots that are doing ASW work?? I'm beginning to wonder that your detection level on subs is not high enough to allow proper attacks to get hits and kills. The last patch was suppose to tone down ASW in deep sea hexes, but make subs in coastal and bases remain the same (easier kills). I'm only a month into my game vs Andy's custody nasty AI and my FP (Kingfishers) and patrol planes finally have their ASW experience for few pilots get above 40. [:)] I have them set at 70% training. I might try training some up on Naval Bombing next. That should be a good combo for ASW work. It has cost me some ships on the West Coast as he has at least 6 subs taking pot shots.
[center]Image[/center]
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: ASW a go-go

Post by Canoerebel »

Most of the pilots in the Kingfishers at LA and SD are high 50s to low 60s.  Some of the other aircraft (SBD-2s and the like) range from the high 30s to low 50s.  None of these aircraft are accomplishing anything.
 
But most irritating is that ASW TFs aren't doing anything.
 
The Japanese have a sub parked at Midway, which is mined, and despite ASW TFs this sub just sits and hammers every transport that comes to port.  What else can I do?  I have the port mined, ASW air patrol, and ASW TFs, and the sub just sits there and does whatever it wants to do.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

Happy New Year - 1943

Post by Canoerebel »

12/28/42 to 01/02/43
 
Happy New Year:  It's 1943 and, despite some bumps, bruises, and a variety of aches and pains, the Allies are in decent shape.  I think Miller has left a gaping hole in his defenses.  If he doesn't act soon to patch the hole, he's going to be in for some headaches of his own.

NoPac:  The Allies are going to pre-position some of the "second wave" troops in the Aleutians; ie, some of the engineers, base forces, and reinforcements that wouldn't go in with the amphibious troops if and when the Allies invade the Kuriles.  With this in mind, a large convoy carrying four Seabee units just left Seattle for Attu.

CenPac:  I-26 claimed two more AKs at Midway.  As noted previously, the Allies have this port mined, there are ASW air patrols, and have three ASW TFs there, but they haven't done a thing.  Accordingly, the Allies are going to pull out the base force, AA unit, and F4F squadron and leave just the infantry and CD.  Supplying Midway is a nightmare.  On the 31st, both Peto and Pompano took shots at Soryu just south of Truk.  I didn't note whether they missed or whether the torpedoes were duds, but I bet Miller blanched.

SoPac:  The gaping hole in the Japanese defenses is in SWPac; the Allies plan to exploit that hole, which means, in turn, that SoPac will become a bit of a backwater.

SWPac:  40 Bettys claimed three APDs bringing a small ground unit to Samaulaki (spelling?), the island north of Darwin.  (That's seven APDs the Allies have lost in the game because the FT feature didn't work - IE, the computer arranged things so that the APDs remained at the target hex during daylight hours rather than arriving and departing in the dark).  The airfield at Samaulaki is 50% to level one.  Once it reaches level one, the Allies will air transport a base force and begin serious reinforcement activity.  Both Lautem and Koepang remain lightly guarded and don't have aircraft.  There are also many other big-potential island bases north of Darwin.  It appears that Miller is concentrating on Milne Bay and Port Moresby rather than on Timor and Ambon.  What really makes this puzzling is that in our WitP game my main vector of attack was through Timor/Ambon in 1943, so Miller has to know I'd be interested in coming this way again

SWPac Elsewhere:  Merauke is building nicely with 400 AV, level 2 airfield (on the way to level 8, eventually) and will soon reach level 2 port.  With big arfields there, at Horn Island, at Darwin, and hopefully soon at Samaulaki (?), it seems that the safest route of approach to Timor/Ambon is around the north side of Oz rather than from Perth.  Accordingly, the Allies are transferring ground troops and many transports to Townsville.  A massed Allied air raid on the 28th destroyed 72 aircraft on the ground at Milne Bay.

Burma:  The Allied army has arrived at Akyab and will bombard tomorrow.  I believe Miller has too much for me to handle and I don't think I can gain control of the air.  A massed Allied raid on the 28th cost the Allies 133 losses to just 21 for the Japanese (some of these losses occurred elsewhere on the map, but most came over Akyab).  The Allies are going to give a good push or two at Akyab.  If things don't look promising, I'm immediately going to pull my troops back.  I'll keep enough in the vicinity to keep Miller honest, but alot of these troops will switch prep to bases in the Celebes and Borneo, move to Bombay, and embark on ship for the long journey to Oz.  Rather than getting bogged down in Burma, the Allies will shift most of the offensive effort to SWPac and try to flood the DEI in 1943.

DEI/KB/Kuriles: Over the coming weeks the Allies should be ready to really ramp up the pressure and the threat level in the DEI and SWPac.  Things need to be really hot here come February.  This will truly be the main vector of attack in 1943, but it also serves as a diversion. if Miller responds by committing the KB down here, the Allies will hit the Kuriles (and possibly Sikhalin Island) around March.  SigInt on the 2nd indicated Miller has 10,552 troops at Toyohara.  That, combined with recent Paramushiro SigInt discussed in a previous post, indicates this region remains lightly guarded.  I "think" that Miller will concentrate on Sikhalin before he would the Kuriles, so the odds are decent that the Allies will proceed with the invasion.  The Allies will have at least eight CVEs available, but I don't think I'll use Wasp or Saratoga.

China:  The Allied reinforcements have arrived at Changteh bringing the AV to 4500, so this base is safe.  Another Japanese unit has arrived near Kweilin, so it wouldn't surprise me if Miller looks this way next.  I can shift units from Changsha quickly to reinforce this base, which currently has a garrison about 1900 AV strong.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Happy New Year - 1943

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Happy New Year:  It's 1943 and, despite some bumps, bruises, and a variety of aches and pains, the Allies are in decent shape. 

OMMM . . .

Let the Torpedoes Be Healed . . .

OMMMMMMMMMMM . . .
The Moose
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24648
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: Happy New Year - 1943

Post by Chickenboy »

Bump for a great AAR that shouldn't be on the second page...
Image
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”