aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned.

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

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

User avatar
jrlans
Posts: 180
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2005 10:58 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned.

Post by jrlans »

Whats your Batvia garrison looking like? Do you think you will be able to keep your AF open there?  How long do you see Batvia holding for Mid to Late march?  Lastly anything going on in the PI, hows bataan holding out?
 
Also i have to say that your convoy interdiction has been masterfull [&o]
 
aztez
Posts: 4031
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:32 am
Location: Finland

RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned.

Post by aztez »

jrlans: The Batavia defense is build up with Commonwealth and Dutch troops. It is almost 1800av strong with tanks supporting the infantry. It ought to hold for late March and who knows maybe a bit longer...

I think the airfield is very hard to close. It will take an major effort due better fighters and large AA guns. Those AA units caused a lot of damage in previous turns. 

The battle of Bataan has not yet started but there are now 37 enemy units in the hex. I did manage to land some 5000 extra supplies into Bataan via "kamikaze" xAKL's. The supply situation is not great but it is not bad either.

I think we shall the first assaults againts Bataan next turn.

Thanks! We actually managed to hit another troop convoy last turn. Needless to say that japanese were not too pleased about this turn of events! [;)]

More on all of these when I get back home. I have been out due to flu past two days. I will update this tonight though.


aztez
Posts: 4031
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:32 am
Location: Finland

RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned.

Post by aztez »

Java (march 1st - 4th 1942)


I did not have combat replay file on this turn but our AA guns took out some +60 Nells at Batavia if intel screen is to believed.

This happened on march 1st, Unfortunately my opponent sent me the wrong combat replay file so I did not see this action. However this very good result for us.

My float planes spotted enemy TF's moving into Palembang two turns ago. I did give him extra turn to load those troops and than I send in our surface combat TF.

This action happened on march 4th at Palembang...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Time Surface Combat, near Palembang at 49,90, Range 22,000 Yards

Japanese Ships
PB Bisan Maru #3, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
PB Choun Maru #18, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
PB Shonan Maru #6, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
PB Shuko Maru #2, Shell hits 1, and is sunk
PB Shonon Maru #10, Shell hits 2, and is sunk
SC Ch 8, Shell hits 2
AK Sado Maru, Shell hits 6, heavy fires, heavy damage
AK Kinka Maru, Shell hits 11, heavy fires, heavy damage
AK Tosan Maru, Shell hits 6, heavy fires
xAP Katori Maru, Shell hits 13, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAP Husimi Maru, Shell hits 17, and is sunk
xAP Miike Maru, Shell hits 5, heavy fires

Allied Ships
CA Louisville, Shell hits 1
DD Stuart
DD Evertsen
DD Stronghold
DE Sutlej

Japanese ground losses:
1441 casualties reported
Squads: 15 destroyed, 59 disabled
Non Combat: 18 destroyed, 42 disabled
Engineers: 7 destroyed, 15 disabled
Guns lost 25 (3 destroyed, 22 disabled)


....I cannot confirm this but I think this was the IJA 4th division loading and heading towards Java.

My opponent was shocked to see our surface combat vessels intercepting this transport TF and stated that this hurt.

Otherwise the japanese troops continue their advance towards Soerabaja.

The whole campaign has been quite costly for the japanese armed forces so far.

Image
Attachments
java.jpg
java.jpg (356.96 KiB) Viewed 424 times
aztez
Posts: 4031
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:32 am
Location: Finland

RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned.

Post by aztez »

Batavia

Image
Attachments
batavia.jpg
batavia.jpg (358.71 KiB) Viewed 424 times
aztez
Posts: 4031
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:32 am
Location: Finland

RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned.

Post by aztez »

South Pacific (march 1st - 4th 1942)


I have read reports that enemy is moving an part of an division into Buna.

Another news was that PBY's spotted two enemy battleships and transports at Rabaul. This was done two turns ago.

After some consideration I did turn my carrier TF towards these targets.

I know he had spotted these carriers near Baker Island but after that I turned my SBD searches to 0% in order to conceal our approach. I did just switch them back ON in order gain maxium amount of information on potential targets.

Well, next turn we are parked just outside Rabaul so we shall see how this goes.

I have no intel whether or not he has seen these carriers so either this mission is a "miss" or "success".

Intresting to see whether our carriers are in action though.

Image
Attachments
carriers.jpg
carriers.jpg (292.12 KiB) Viewed 424 times
Smeulders
Posts: 1879
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2009 6:13 pm

RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned.

Post by Smeulders »

So that's a good part of division gone, plus the destruction of some of the only AK your opponent will get, talk about a successful raid.  
The AE-Wiki, help fill it out
aztez
Posts: 4031
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:32 am
Location: Finland

RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned.

Post by aztez »

Smeulders: Yeah, that pretty much sums it up. Not bad, not bad at all.


Southern Pacific (march 5th - 6th 1942)


Quiet turn in Java and no ground offensives in Bataan peninsula. I wonder what is keeping him starting that.

The US carriers advanced into Rabaul region. There were no battleships to be found so I guess he had some intel or got lucky.

Instead we found an empty transport TF (or maybe a supply convoy) and few ships were sunk.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Kavieng at 107,122

Weather in hex: Moderate rain

Raid spotted at 45 NM, estimated altitude 15,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 17 minutes


Allied aircraft
F4F-3A Wildcat x 11
F4F-3 Wildcat x 11
SBD-3 Dauntless x 75
TBD-1 Devastator x 30


Allied aircraft losses
SBD-3 Dauntless: 2 damaged
TBD-1 Devastator: 2 damaged

Japanese Ships
xAK Venice Maru, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAK Matsue Maru, Bomb hits 6, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAK Kunitu Maru, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage
PB Okiyu Maru, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
xAK Kogyoku Maru, Bomb hits 3, and is sunk
DD Oite
PB Shoei Maru, Bomb hits 3, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
DD Yayoi, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage
PB Kyo Maru #10, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
PB Kyo Maru #8, Bomb hits 5, and is sunk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Kavieng at 107,122

Weather in hex: Severe storms

Raid spotted at 42 NM, estimated altitude 15,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 16 minutes


Allied aircraft
F2A-3 Buffalo x 9
F4F-3A Wildcat x 11
F4F-3 Wildcat x 11
SBD-3 Dauntless x 29


Allied aircraft losses
SBD-3 Dauntless: 1 damaged

Japanese Ships
DD Oite, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
PB Santos Maru, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage
PB Okiyu Maru, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk


...this was the highlight of the turn.

Image
Attachments
rabaul.jpg
rabaul.jpg (226.85 KiB) Viewed 424 times
User avatar
jrlans
Posts: 180
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2005 10:58 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

RE: aztez (a) vs Katsuragi (j) ...lessons learned.

Post by jrlans »

Re: Bataan do you have an idea of your opponets AV there?  If not might be worthwhile to do one bombardment just to get an idea.  Its possible that all that is commited is a blocking force to prevent you from getting out. Effectivly turning bataan into a PoW camp.
 
Re: Rabaul, did you have any units set to recon rabaul directly, if not you might try a port attack before retiring as those BBs might have been disbanded in port. (i would only sugesst this if you know for certain where KB is and you know you have time to get out before it responds)
aztez
Posts: 4031
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:32 am
Location: Finland

US carriers clash with IJN near Kavieng...

Post by aztez »

jrlans: I think he has nearly 40 units there. I haven't launched even bombardment assaults. That is definately not blocking force.

No, I had not or well.. those PBY's flying out of Port Moresby showed that the harbour was empty.

...and now this kind of leads me to the next thing.


South Pacific (march 7th - 8th 1942)


I will just post an combat report here and it is quite self explanotory. Comments after the combat replay files....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Kavieng at 107,121

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid detected at 160 NM, estimated altitude 12,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 60 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M2 Zero x 18
B5N1 Kate x 31
B5N2 Kate x 43
D3A1 Val x 21



Allied aircraft
F2A-3 Buffalo x 2
F4F-3A Wildcat x 19
F4F-3 Wildcat x 29


Japanese aircraft losses
A6M2 Zero: 3 destroyed
B5N1 Kate: 11 destroyed, 7 damaged
B5N2 Kate: 14 destroyed, 9 damaged
D3A1 Val: 5 destroyed, 5 damaged


Allied Ships
CVL Hermes, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
CV Lexington, Bomb hits 2, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
CV Saratoga
CL Phoenix
CA San Francisco, Torpedo hits 1
DD Dewey

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Lihir at 111,119

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid detected at 40 NM, estimated altitude 16,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 15 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 28
A6M2 Zero x 44



Allied aircraft
F2A-3 Buffalo x 8
F4F-3A Wildcat x 18
F4F-3 Wildcat x 15
SBD-2 Dauntless x 15
SBD-3 Dauntless x 119
TBD-1 Devastator x 45


Japanese aircraft losses
A5M4 Claude: 2 destroyed
A6M2 Zero: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F2A-3 Buffalo: 2 destroyed
F4F-3A Wildcat: 2 destroyed
F4F-3 Wildcat: 1 destroyed
SBD-2 Dauntless: 1 destroyed, 5 damaged
SBD-3 Dauntless: 9 destroyed, 51 damaged
TBD-1 Devastator: 6 destroyed, 6 damaged

Japanese Ships
CA Haguro
CV Akagi, Bomb hits 1
CVE Hosho, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires
CA Atago, Bomb hits 2, on fire
CVL Shoho, Bomb hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage
CVL Zuiho, Bomb hits 7, heavy fires, heavy damage
DD Hayashio, Bomb hits 1, on fire
DD Wakatake
CVL Ryujo, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires
DD Sanae, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires
CVE Taiyo, Bomb hits 1, on fire
DD Oshio
DD Amatsukaze, Bomb hits 1, on fire
DD Michishio
DD Oyashio

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Kavieng at 107,121

Weather in hex: Heavy rain

Raid detected at 43 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 18 minutes

Japanese aircraft
B5N2 Kate x 6



Allied aircraft
F2A-3 Buffalo x 2
F4F-3A Wildcat x 10
F4F-3 Wildcat x 24


Japanese aircraft losses
B5N2 Kate: 3 destroyed

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Lihir at 111,119

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid detected at 35 NM, estimated altitude 16,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 23 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 16
A6M2 Zero x 20



Allied aircraft
Swordfish I x 12


No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
Swordfish I: 3 destroyed

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Lihir at 112,119

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid detected at 120 NM, estimated altitude 14,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 45 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 8
A6M2 Zero x 10
B5N2 Kate x 5
D3A1 Val x 18



Allied aircraft
F2A-3 Buffalo x 2
F4F-3A Wildcat x 11
F4F-3 Wildcat x 31


Japanese aircraft losses
A5M4 Claude: 3 destroyed
A6M2 Zero: 2 destroyed
B5N2 Kate: 2 destroyed, 1 damaged
D3A1 Val: 6 destroyed, 3 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-3A Wildcat: 1 destroyed
F4F-3 Wildcat: 1 destroyed

Allied Ships
CL Honolulu
CV Saratoga, Bomb hits 1

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Truk at 111,115

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid detected at 40 NM, estimated altitude 14,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 18 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 12
A6M2 Zero x 14



Allied aircraft
F2A-3 Buffalo x 6
F4F-3A Wildcat x 7
F4F-3 Wildcat x 12
SBD-2 Dauntless x 5
SBD-3 Dauntless x 67
TBD-1 Devastator x 30


Japanese aircraft losses
A5M4 Claude: 1 destroyed
A6M2 Zero: 1 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
F4F-3A Wildcat: 1 destroyed
SBD-2 Dauntless: 1 destroyed, 2 damaged
SBD-3 Dauntless: 1 destroyed, 28 damaged
TBD-1 Devastator: 7 damaged

Japanese Ships
CVE Taiyo, Bomb hits 4, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
CVE Hosho, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage
CVL Ryujo, Bomb hits 6, heavy fires, heavy damage
CA Haguro, Bomb hits 1, on fire
CV Akagi, Bomb hits 1, on fire
DD Amatsukaze
DD Hayashio, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage
DD Natsushio, Bomb hits 1
DD Oshio
CA Myoko, Bomb hits 1, on fire
DD Kuroshio, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires
DD Hatsukaze
DD Oyashio

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Truk at 111,115

Weather in hex: Clear sky

Raid detected at 40 NM, estimated altitude 11,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 26 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A5M4 Claude x 5
A6M2 Zero x 8



Allied aircraft
Swordfish I x 12


No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
Swordfish I: 6 destroyed, 2 damaged

Japanese Ships
CV Akagi, heavy fires

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Truk at 111,115

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid spotted at 49 NM, estimated altitude 15,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 19 minutes


Allied aircraft
SBD-2 Dauntless x 2
SBD-3 Dauntless x 20
TBD-1 Devastator x 10


Allied aircraft losses
SBD-2 Dauntless: 2 damaged
SBD-3 Dauntless: 8 damaged
TBD-1 Devastator: 1 damaged

Japanese Ships
CV Akagi, Bomb hits 2, Torpedo hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
BB Mutsu
CA Haguro, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires
CA Nachi, Bomb hits 4, heavy fires
CA Myoko
DD Natsushio, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage
DD Oshio

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Truk at 111,115

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid spotted at 18 NM, estimated altitude 15,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 6 minutes

Japanese aircraft
no flights


Allied aircraft
F2A-3 Buffalo x 4
F4F-3A Wildcat x 5
F4F-3 Wildcat x 3
SBD-3 Dauntless x 39
TBD-1 Devastator x 16


Japanese aircraft losses
No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
SBD-3 Dauntless: 1 destroyed, 20 damaged
TBD-1 Devastator: 2 damaged

Japanese Ships
DD Asashio
CA Myoko, Bomb hits 7, heavy fires, heavy damage
CV Akagi, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
CA Nachi, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
DD Kuroshio, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage
DD Oyashio
DD Oshio
DD Hatsukaze, Bomb hits 1
DD Amatsukaze


This all happened near Kavieng. I was very suprised to see this happening but than again I was kind of hoping for this from the start.

That is why we went towards Rabaul and not into Java as suggested.

My opponent gave me a hint about possible redo and I will give it to him if he insist on having it. Allthough there a quite a few things about this... a) I did not engage on this since my carriers were set on react 0! b) The japanese fleet had time to sail away from this battle but instead chose to commit c) I put very much time into this operation (as well as all the other aspects of this game) and d) the losses are not that badly in favour of allies.

By looking at the combat replay I would say 1 x CV sunk, 1 x CV likely to sunk and 1 x CV/CVL damaged.

I had my torpedo bombers on 7000 feet, diverbombers and escorts duty fighters on 11 000 feet and CAP fighters at 15 000 feet.

I did send my opponent an email so we shall see. As said if he insist on having redo than I guess I wll let him have one. Allthough there really wasn't any bugs involved or such.

Without being an ego maniac I just played good on this mission / strategy and it paid off.

Here is an pic from the battle...

Image
Attachments
carriers.jpg
carriers.jpg (209.93 KiB) Viewed 424 times
User avatar
jrlans
Posts: 180
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2005 10:58 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

RE: US carriers clash with IJN near Kavieng...

Post by jrlans »

If there were no bugs i dont know why a "do over" would be in order other than your oppenent doesnt like the results. 
 
I think you got a little lucky AZ but you know the saying luck favors the bold.  Still good planning paid off and a good vicotry (if it doesnt get writen out of history). 
 
Overal its 1 allied CV (assuming Lex sinks) to 1 CV 3 CVLs and 2 or 3 CVEs (though his air groups will divert to rabual and Lex's is either gone or distruibuted to several allied CVs)
 
Also im sure your CV airgroups are hurting. I wonder how many of those damaged planes are W/offs or crashed on thier way home. Strangely this will probably give you opponet some breathing room for a bit as you air groups will probably be lacking for replacements for at least a month or 2.  If I were him i would use this time to grab my "must have" bases while i can.
 
While im sure this is painfull for japan its by no means game over.  This isnt even a midway, Kb for the most part is still intact (assuming Kaga didnt sink) thats still 5 CVs work with, with Juyno and Hiyo comming off the slip soon.
aztez
Posts: 4031
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:32 am
Location: Finland

RE: US carriers clash with IJN near Kavieng...

Post by aztez »

I did few email exchanges with katsuragi. Well, hat off to him too. By redo he meant the rematch after this one is over.
 
Thus meaning the above results stands and it is an allied victory.
 
What I did give him (he did not ask for any mercy) though was the fact that I will not pursue his battered fleet nor I will move any subs between current location and Truk.
 
He can try to to intervene with his submarines though. I have plenty of ASW power with these carriers.
 
Basically and misunderstanding here. I will happily give him a rematch when we are done and most likely will japanese myself.
 
Hmmm, I must thank Dave and other forum members that have contributed on my journeys. "Lessons learned" for sure...!
aztez
Posts: 4031
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:32 am
Location: Finland

RE: US carriers clash with IJN near Kavieng...

Post by aztez »

jrlans: As just posted there was an misunderstanding. The "redo" was an rematch once this war is over. Happy to give him that and I'am good for my word.
 
Maybe, it really could have gone either way. I have kept those pilots on training mode since the start of the game so they were very high in terms experience levels.
 
You cannot win wars without luck and this one had some. Personally this has been the most aggressive PBEM I have ever played! Amazing amount of action.. cannot say that the game vs Dave has been peaceful either.
 
I don't have the turn yet but most likely those squadrons are depleted. Some of them took off to Gasmata and need to be moved.
 
That is exactly my thoughts too. The game is far from over and a lot of action ahead. This does mean though that his expansion timeframe just got shrunken. That was the aim and it was achieved.
 
Eager to look at those CV's and how much was FOW. I do however have 2 RN CV's and 1 US CV entering the Pacific from Balboa as we speak so we still have significant carrier force to sail around.
 
As always appreciated the comments! [:)]
User avatar
SqzMyLemon
Posts: 4239
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 2:18 pm
Location: Alberta, Canada

RE: US carriers clash with IJN near Kavieng...

Post by SqzMyLemon »

Hi aztez,

Playing as the Japanese myself and with my limited playing experience, I think you had your opponent dead to rights. I'm not familiar with two day turns, but he had a chance to see what he was up against the turn before and should have retired to fight another day. Maybe he was confident he'd come out on top, but as the results show, he guessed wrong. Commiting all the CVL's with just one CV to bolster his fleet wasn't a smart idea versus your 2 CV's and CVL, not to mention not upgrading his Claudes to Zero's. I wonder also if he expanded his carrier squadrons to their fullest capacity. You may have gotten better then expected results (I think defensive carrier CAP is too easily blown through myself), but looking at the number of DB's you had, that's a potent offensive force. The Japanese CVL's are great for picking off stragglers, but relying on them to take on full fledged American CV's is foolhardy in my opinion. It takes almost three of the CVL's to match one American carrier, so he certainly didn't outnumber you in terms of aircraft.

I think you should hold your ground to have the turn stand, as you said, you planned for this operation and your aggressiveness paid off. I think it's great you are even contemplating giving your opponent a break here in the spirit of a competitive game, but I think you deserved the outcome and play should continue. If you settle on a redo, I look forward to reading about the next battle when you do it again. [:D]

I just saw your latest post about the "rematch" misunderstanding...well done then, and kudos to your opponent for accepting the results.
Luck is the residue of design - John Milton

Don't mistake lack of talent for genius - Peter Steele (Type O Negative)
aztez
Posts: 4031
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:32 am
Location: Finland

RE: US carriers clash with IJN near Kavieng...

Post by aztez »

SqzMyLemon: I actually follow your journeys as japanese "samurai". I like the AAR. Mostly read about at the work so not that much time to comment on it.

Basically there is  just one big diffrence with one day and multiple day turns. Once you commit into something you better be sure you want to do this. To me that is more historical and adds flavour.

In one day turns you can micromanage yourself out of the harms way many times more.

Not going to debate which format is better. Personally I like multiple day turns much more though.

I think those "Claudes" might have something to do with Java. That place really hasn't been an vacation for them either. His Zero loss numbers are in three digits even with FOW included.

The CAP might be passed but the actual hit ratio on any ships is something else usually. Now I did obey with few tricks , the alltitude, the CAP set on few squadrons etc.

I don't know whether you have noticed this one but it is important to keep the alltitudes correct when you train. That way your pilots are doing this training correctly. Ie. you want divebombers to train low alltitude strikes and keep the alltitude meter low. Well, you most likely have noticed that too.

I always get cold feeling when these battles happen. PBEM is about trust and endurance so happy to say we are in safe waters. There is always a chance your opponent will vanish after some incident. I know Dave wohn't since he get to kick my butt years in game time! [:D]

Kudos to him surely and now we shall see how he feels about fortress Java and Bataan peninsula. I doubt he knows how prepared we are actually.

Thanks for the comments.
User avatar
Graymane
Posts: 584
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 11:21 pm
Location: Bellevue, NE

RE: US carriers clash with IJN near Kavieng...

Post by Graymane »

can't believe you are playing another one with your old one going or is that one over now? Incredibly different start to this one eh? =)
A computer without COBOL and Fortran is like a piece of chocolate cake without ketchup and mustard.
aztez
Posts: 4031
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:32 am
Location: Finland

RE: US carriers clash with IJN near Kavieng...

Post by aztez »

Graymane: No, the game vs erstad is very much alive.

I thought about another journey ongoing and couldn't resist of starting another AAR.

Yeah, this game is very diffrent and somehow katsuragi's aggressive playing style suits me just fine.

On an sidenote the carriers are "ok" condition. One sunk and couple damaged. I will post more about these tonight.
aztez
Posts: 4031
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:32 am
Location: Finland

RE: US carriers clash with IJN near Kavieng...

Post by aztez »

The "enemy thoughts and reasons for last turns carrier battle

I did get on email and some views what happened on enemy perspective.

- His carriers were covering troop transports and battleships.
- The previous turn hit on few supply ships indicated just 2 US CV's in the area so he decieded to engage.
- The Claude's were there because fighters losses on Java has been heavy.
- Another reason for not getting damage control is 2 day turns. As said you cannot micromanage your way out of troubles so easily.

That concludes the enemy perspective on the battle of Kavieng.

Normal update tonight and that shows the damage and status of CV's etc.

User avatar
Graymane
Posts: 584
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 11:21 pm
Location: Bellevue, NE

RE: US carriers clash with IJN near Kavieng...

Post by Graymane »

I think you've shown a great example in the open phases of why you don't want to Sir Robin in the DEI.
A computer without COBOL and Fortran is like a piece of chocolate cake without ketchup and mustard.
aztez
Posts: 4031
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:32 am
Location: Finland

RE: US carriers clash with IJN near Kavieng...

Post by aztez »

Graymane: I cannot argue with that statement. It also has been very much fun to do battle it out in DEI.

We just managed to sneak in fresh squadron of P39D's so that is welcome addition at Batavia. I know I eventually lose the battle here but the gains outweight any losses 100:1.

Very happy how things played out and another thing is that the surface fleet got to see quite a lot of action too.


Aftermath of carrier clash near Kavieng


I did get the actual turn and it was better than expected.

Only CV Lexington sunk and even her fighter and bomber squadrons mostly made it out. Some of them landed at Gasmata and are enroute to safety and others landed in diffrent carriers.

CVL Hermes is the other carrier that got mildly damaged in this battle.

All in all very good effort by our carrier force.

The SBD and Torpedo bombers took an hit but the losses are not that bad and they should recover to full strenght swiftly.

Now I decieded not to pursue the crippled japanese fleet. Instead I did turn away and sail towards south. The SBD's and Devastators are taken out of navalstrike missions and set to ASW patrol or rest mode.

I did inform this to my opponent when I send the new turn back. I could have launched 2-3 large strikes againts those japanese ships but didn't feel comfortable of doing so. The battle itself was an success even with that maneuvere. The carrier fighters are set on 80% CAP and 20% rest.

Only thing I did was to send 20 4E bombers into Port Moresby and ordered them to hit the airfield at Rabaul.

Here is an pic from the allied carriers. They are heading out to refuel now.

Image
Attachments
carriers.jpg
carriers.jpg (204.88 KiB) Viewed 424 times
User avatar
jrlans
Posts: 180
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2005 10:58 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

RE: US carriers clash with IJN near Kavieng...

Post by jrlans »

Good news about Lex's air groups. What are you going to do with them?  Darwin sounds like a good port of call to me if you can get them there. Otherwise they might be very usefull in training replacement USN pilots for you operating CVs.
 
Also good call IMHO on retiring, no sence in turring a victory into possible defeat the IJN still has BBs around and a mid ocean intercept could ruin your day.
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”