Aussies vs Amis - World Defence(no Joe or Nik)

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

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

jrcar
Posts: 2301
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2002 3:16 pm
Location: Seymour, Australia

RE: Aussies vs Amis - World Defence(no Joe or Nik)

Post by jrcar »

The BB's at Zamboanga were interesting... good intel, that makes at least 7 BB in the area... good to know!

Having Kaimana is very very nice. An expanding torent approach is forming... if I can get forces moving on the other side of the coast!

Cheers

Rob

AE BETA Breaker
Alfred
Posts: 6683
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 7:56 am

RE: Aussies vs Amis - World Defence(no Joe or Nik)

Post by Alfred »

ORIGINAL: jrcar

10-11 Sep 1942

...Which enouraged our troops to give the enemy a bit more of the old bayount (the ratio increased!).

Ground combat at Zamboanga (75,89)...


You do recall what Corporal Jones in "Dad's Army" regularly said about bayonets:

"They don't like them, Captain Mainwaring"

Of course he was referring to Kitchener's 1898 Sudanese campaign. With the recent reported US Army decision to phase out bayonets, it won't be long before someone posts here the question:

"What is a bayonet?"

Alfred
jrcar
Posts: 2301
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2002 3:16 pm
Location: Seymour, Australia

RE: Aussies vs Amis - World Defence(no Joe or Nik)

Post by jrcar »

Gagh I can't believe I misspelt bayonet.... I was in a rush...


Yep they don't like it up 'em!

Cheers

Rob
AE BETA Breaker
jrcar
Posts: 2301
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2002 3:16 pm
Location: Seymour, Australia

RE: Aussies vs Amis - World Defence(no Joe or Nik)

Post by jrcar »

Sigint indicates the 11th Div is on transports to Onnetaken-Jima... I don't think we can intercept them with anything... but having a Div there stops any real thoughts of a Kurile adventure... well hat wasn't going to happen during the winter, so I guess it is still an option for mid 43!

Have to clear Adak first...

Cheers

Rob

AE BETA Breaker
User avatar
Rob Brennan UK
Posts: 3685
Joined: Sat Aug 24, 2002 8:36 pm
Location: London UK

RE: Aussies vs Amis - World Defence(no Joe or Nik)

Post by Rob Brennan UK »

"They don't like them, Captain Mainwaring"

Wasn't it " They don't like it up em !" .. also many referances to fuzzywuzzies which todays PC police would ban immediately /sigh.

Bayonet = lightbulb attachment. how can that hurt ? [;)]
sorry for the spelling . English is my main language , I just can't type . and i'm too lazy to edit :)
jrcar
Posts: 2301
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2002 3:16 pm
Location: Seymour, Australia

RE: Aussies vs Amis - World Defence(no Joe or Nik)

Post by jrcar »

Yep don't like it up 'em....

The bayonet lightbulb hurts when the glass breaks!

Cheers

Rob

ORIGINAL: Rob Brennan UK
"They don't like them, Captain Mainwaring"

Wasn't it " They don't like it up em !" .. also many referances to fuzzywuzzies which todays PC police would ban immediately /sigh.

Bayonet = lightbulb attachment. how can that hurt ? [;)]
AE BETA Breaker
jrcar
Posts: 2301
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2002 3:16 pm
Location: Seymour, Australia

RE: Aussies vs Amis - World Defence(no Joe or Nik)

Post by jrcar »

12-13 Sep 1942

Subs
Bit of action from both sides but no bangs. Off Milne bay though we get some decent ASW hits on a Japanese sub, it will be going home...

Burma
The JAAF was mostly absent over the area. Some strikes on our flanking forces, and they intercepted and shot down 5-10 Blenheims in our attacks.

Over Rangoon around 60 B-17 worked over the airfield, followed by a series of attacks by about half of the Allied Army!

Ground combat at Rangoon (54,53)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 62228 troops, 851 guns, 996 vehicles, Assault Value = 1761

Defending force 17816 troops, 149 guns, 78 vehicles, Assault Value = 466

Allied engineers reduce fortifications to 2

Allied adjusted assault: 1387

Japanese adjusted defense: 877

Allied assault odds: 1 to 1 (fort level 2)

Allied Assault reduces fortifications to 2

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), forts(+), op mode(-), leaders(+), disruption(-)
preparation(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
1376 casualties reported
Squads: 5 destroyed, 83 disabled
Non Combat: 8 destroyed, 166 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 8 disabled
Vehicles lost 34 (2 destroyed, 32 disabled)


Allied ground losses:
1268 casualties reported
Squads: 10 destroyed, 38 disabled
Non Combat: 7 destroyed, 92 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 11 disabled
Guns lost 1 (0 destroyed, 1 disabled)
Vehicles lost 28 (0 destroyed, 28 disabled)


Assaulting units:
23rd British Brigade
42nd Cavalry Regiment
41st Infantry Division
22nd (East African) Brigade
17th Australian Brigade
16th British Brigade
2/15 Punjab Battalion
7th Aus Div Cav Regiment
16th Australian Brigade
19th Australian Brigade
23rd Indian Division
2/1 AIF Pioneer Battalion
45th Recce Regiment
23rd Indian Mountain Gun Regiment
21st Indian Mountain Gun Regiment
XV Indian Corps
6th Medium Regiment

Defending units:
18th Division
3rd Air Division
44th Field AA Battalion

Ground combat at Rangoon (54,53)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 61081 troops, 851 guns, 996 vehicles, Assault Value = 1685

Defending force 15937 troops, 149 guns, 76 vehicles, Assault Value = 384

Allied adjusted assault: 1319

Japanese adjusted defense: 621

Allied assault odds: 2 to 1 (fort level 2)

Allied Assault reduces fortifications to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), op mode(-), leaders(+), disruption(-)
preparation(-)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
1797 casualties reported
Squads: 5 destroyed, 71 disabled
Non Combat: 13 destroyed, 181 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 11 disabled
Guns lost 2 (0 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Vehicles lost 34 (6 destroyed, 28 disabled)


Allied ground losses:
1297 casualties reported
Squads: 10 destroyed, 111 disabled
Non Combat: 7 destroyed, 108 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Guns lost 2 (0 destroyed, 2 disabled)
Vehicles lost 34 (3 destroyed, 31 disabled)


If the Japanes were 1.5 divs, and had lvl 4 forts we wouldn't be moving.... the only problem with tis approach is the 18th Div will fall back on Pegu, which is going to be a real pain to take...

Tony also hits Port Blair with Wellingtons and they do good damage to the airfield. It looks like they are not trying to defend?


PI
At Zamboanga I continue to try to clear the Japanese who have landed so far. I have the odds (40:1 then 14:1) but the Japanese just aren't dying :(.

DEI
A 6" gun CL TF hits Koepang nicely!

Naval bombardment of Koepang at 68,116

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Japanese aircraft losses
No Japanese losses

Allied Ships
CL Newcastle
CL Mauritius
CL Hobart
DD Electra
DD Arrow
DD Tjerk Hiddes
DD Van Galen
DD Isaac Sweers

Japanese ground losses:
66 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 6 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled

Airbase hits 47
Airbase supply hits 17
Runway hits 187
Port hits 1


Only an Inf Regt is detected here (4th Inf). This should have closed the base down, will start bombing from Broome which has just reached lvl 4 airfield to make sure of it.


SWPAC

We are flying lots of recon. Koepang has decent numbers of aircraft and a lot of shipping in port. Other bases also have aircraft. The B-24 units and the B-17 units are just about full and reasonably traing (40-50's) so will start the air campaign agin here soon.

Madang falls to a para attack.

A BF is flown into Kaimana.

Apart from a few TF spoted in the area it is quiet.

SOPAC
Forces continue to pour into Rabaul. Have begun moving back the Pacific Ocean Marine regiments to Townsville as a backload. Shortland is a nice little supporting base, and Tulagi is building. Lifting forces from Luganville to Rabaul.

Fiji has no fuel, but 100k is on its way soon. Shipping is gathering here as we lift forces forward to Rabaul and TB.

A BB TF has left Suva for Townsville, 3 old BB's and escorts.


CENTPAC
The CV TF's are now halfway to PH from Suva. Fast BB's and another CLAA has arrived at PH.

NORPAC
The usual. The BB bombardment TF has put to sea, and I will attack again in a turn or two with its support.

China
At Kanshein they rest and bombard from air and ground. Not much we can do.




Image
Attachments
19420914_burma.jpg
19420914_burma.jpg (234.71 KiB) Viewed 341 times
AE BETA Breaker
jrcar
Posts: 2301
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2002 3:16 pm
Location: Seymour, Australia

RE: Aussies vs Amis - World Defence(no Joe or Nik)

Post by jrcar »

It looks like we are going to be able to bounce them out of southern Burma.... it depends on how much they have at Pegu and how well dug in they are. The fact they didn't counter against the 3 armounred units that moved into Pegu is an indication they aren't in a good shape. They continue to send forces against our inland flanking attack, which is a good thing for us!

Cheers
Rob
AE BETA Breaker
DanielAnsell
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 9:43 am
Location: United States

RE: Aussies vs Amis - World Defence(no Joe or Nik)

Post by DanielAnsell »

Great AAR as always, jrcar!

It looks like they are trying to either pull troops out, or maybe rail some in. They took a hit for ops mode.
User avatar
Cribtop
Posts: 3890
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 1:42 pm
Location: Lone Star Nation

RE: Aussies vs Amis - World Defence(no Joe or Nik)

Post by Cribtop »

The enemy is in trouble in Burma. This will soon be the Thailand front.
Image
jrcar
Posts: 2301
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2002 3:16 pm
Location: Seymour, Australia

RE: Aussies vs Amis - World Defence(no Joe or Nik)

Post by jrcar »

We are still shaking our heads in disbelief... we are only here (Rangoon) because they have let us.

They should concentrte thier Divisions and counter attack at one point, we would be screwed...

Cheers
Rob
ORIGINAL: Cribtop

The enemy is in trouble in Burma. This will soon be the Thailand front.
AE BETA Breaker
User avatar
Cribtop
Posts: 3890
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 1:42 pm
Location: Lone Star Nation

RE: Aussies vs Amis - World Defence(no Joe or Nik)

Post by Cribtop »

Agreed. Sometimes Player morale gets in the way of good decisions. Y'all's Burma offensive was partly smoke and mirrors AV wise. Perhaps the enemy fears the eventual Allied steamroller so much that they didn't pay attention to the calendar and the actual, rather than perceived, size of your advancing armies.
Image
jrcar
Posts: 2301
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2002 3:16 pm
Location: Seymour, Australia

RE: Aussies vs Amis - World Defence(no Joe or Nik)

Post by jrcar »

I think the appearance of "Allied Air superiority" is the main culprite. In WITP this definately was an issue, in AE aircraft replacement rates (compared to WITP) are dramatically lower... until about mid 1943.

From other AARs neither Allied or Japanese players appear to appreciate that for the Japanese the important thing early on is:

Destruction of the Allied airforce, in particular on the ground where possible (in particular the 4E types).

Destruction of allied combat units (via descending on isolated Garrisons). This delays the Allied counter attack.

Ground it self has little importance. Come mid 1943 the Allies can bypass as much as they want, and potentially generate a 3-4 div landing force ANYWHERE. Nomea and Fiji are only useful to destroy units that a foolish Allied player who defends with too little, and to delay fuel to Oz (the bulk of which should come from the Middle East... taking Perth to deny this fuel to Oz is, I admit, appealing...)


For the Allies it is delay, delay, delay, while concentrating and culminating the Japanese, before they stop and dig in... once dug in Japanese forces are a real pain...

For us Adak culminated them... it was a close run thing... but we got there in the end.

A mistake they made at both PM and Adak was to close the place down, but then to not attack with enough, or to supress the closed base, so we were able to get back up and running. Plus we didn't loose many aircraft.

Cheers
Rob
ORIGINAL: Cribtop

Agreed. Sometimes Player morale gets in the way of good decisions. Y'all's Burma offensive was partly smoke and mirrors AV wise. Perhaps the enemy fears the eventual Allied steamroller so much that they didn't pay attention to the calendar and the actual, rather than perceived, size of your advancing armies.
AE BETA Breaker
User avatar
Nemo121
Posts: 5838
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 11:15 am
Contact:

RE: Aussies vs Amis - World Defence(no Joe or Nik)

Post by Nemo121 »

Umm, I wouldn't say everyone is unaware of the importance of saving the air force and ground units and not spreading them around in penny packets to be destroyed cheaply in series...

I think that in this game and in my game the lack of speed of the Japanese thrust has also helped immensely... In your game they've also made the huge mistake of, on several occasions, attacking bases with insufficient force and then neither quickly reinforcing nor pulling back but accepting attritional meat-grinding. Mostly this appears to have been done on Nikademus' side of things - I think he is the weak link on that team based on the current position although I admit he simply may not have been given sufficient forces for the job by Wilkerson, although if that's the case he still bears the blame for not pulling back once he realised he couldn't take Adak.

I think your opponents are now so mired in a defensive mindset that the fact that they could counter-attack successfully if they just mustered their defensive forces into an offensive thrust appears to have utterly escaped them... Their OODA loop appears broken and it appears they are no longer oriented to the realities on the ground and thus their decisions and actions are becoming increasingly irrelevant. I am certain that if you take Rangoon etc this will be held, by them, as further proof of the strength of your offensive and their need to phase completely over to the defensive when, in fact, it means no such thing at all.


As to you being where you are because they let you... 9 times out of 10 people defeat themselves and the battlefield exchange of territory etc merely plays out what has already gone on in the opponents' minds. This is a clear example of that. More times than I care to remember my opponents have abandoned clearly winning positions etc simply because they convinced themselves they couldn't hold in spite of far superior forces and locations. I think that's all we're seeing here. It does reflect on your good play though.
John Dillworth: "I had GreyJoy check my spelling and he said it was fine."
Well, that's that settled then.
jrcar
Posts: 2301
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2002 3:16 pm
Location: Seymour, Australia

RE: Aussies vs Amis - World Defence(no Joe or Nik)

Post by jrcar »

Thanks Nemo, yes I should have modified my language a bit... what you are doing is very interesting!

Cheers

Rob
AE BETA Breaker
jrcar
Posts: 2301
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2002 3:16 pm
Location: Seymour, Australia

RE: Aussies vs Amis - World Defence(no Joe or Nik)

Post by jrcar »

Nik is interesting to deal with, as he often does out of the box things... and sometimes he gets away with it! Joe is very methodical, too methodical really for playing Japanese as the Japanese player needs to accept more risk (and can afford to do so generally) where as the Allied player needs to really husband resorces and not waste them...

I have a lot of respect for both as players, they are both good, but aI think you are right, they are talking themselves out of things, and we are bluffing nicely in a few areas!

Cheers

Rob
AE BETA Breaker
jrcar
Posts: 2301
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2002 3:16 pm
Location: Seymour, Australia

RE: Aussies vs Amis - World Defence(no Joe or Nik)

Post by jrcar »

Here is Burma.

At Rangoon we have a US Div, Aussie Div, 2 Brit/Indian Divs total 1600 AV.

At Pegu we have an Aussie Div, Chinese forces, and a collection of Burma/Brit/Indian units with about 4 armourde units. Total 1600 AV, but not well prepped (if at all ) for Pegu.

To the right of them on the Map we have a Brit Bn feighting against their forces in the forest, which now appear to be in retreat.

On the Tahi/Burma border we have 2 bdes that have molested the Recon/tk units back accross the border, but more reinforcements are on the way.

Deep we have the Bataan BF marching to Rangoon. It was evacuated to French territory early in the war, and has spent the last month marching from China back to Burma. It will make a nice BF for Rangoon!

We have about 3-4 bdes of troops defending the line ofcCommunications back through Burma, with lots of engineers building more airfields.

Toungoo and Prome have around 100 fighters each, with the bombers generally operating back further.

Cheers

Rob

Image
Attachments
19420914_burma_2.jpg
19420914_burma_2.jpg (275.33 KiB) Viewed 341 times
AE BETA Breaker
jrcar
Posts: 2301
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2002 3:16 pm
Location: Seymour, Australia

RE: Aussies vs Amis - World Defence(no Joe or Nik)

Post by jrcar »

14=15 Sep 1942 A big turn for the Allies!

Subs
Subs are active around the place, they now have a number around Rabaul, and around Dutch Harbour. One of the later sink a YP between Dutch Harbour and Adak.

With the signint of the 11th div in the Kuriles I send over ome subs, they attack a large xAP but get no hits. I may be ble to get a SCTF here in time to catch this force....

Burma
They land at Little Andaman.

We hit Port Blair with Wellingtons, and the forces at Rangoon with B-17.

WE attack at Rangoon!

Ground combat at Rangoon (54,53)

Allied Shock attack

Attacking force 59928 troops, 851 guns, 993 vehicles, Assault Value = 1613

Defending force 13955 troops, 149 guns, 70 vehicles, Assault Value = 314

Allied adjusted assault: 3129

Japanese adjusted defense: 51

Allied assault odds: 61 to 1 (fort level 1)

Allied forces CAPTURE Rangoon !!!

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Japanese aircraft losses
No Japanese losses

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), op mode(-), disruption(-), preparation(-)
fatigue(-)
Attacker: shock(+)

Japanese ground losses:
6237 casualties reported
Squads: 140 destroyed, 61 disabled
Non Combat: 260 destroyed, 48 disabled
Engineers: 38 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 48 (47 destroyed, 1 disabled)
Vehicles lost 68 (68 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Units retreated 2


Allied ground losses:
981 casualties reported
Squads: 3 destroyed, 60 disabled
Non Combat: 4 destroyed, 99 disabled
Engineers: 3 destroyed, 8 disabled
Guns lost 1 (0 destroyed, 1 disabled)
Vehicles lost 21 (0 destroyed, 21 disabled)


Assaulting units:
23rd Indian Division
16th Australian Brigade
23rd British Brigade
22nd (East African) Brigade
2/1 AIF Pioneer Battalion
16th British Brigade
17th Australian Brigade
41st Infantry Division
19th Australian Brigade
42nd Cavalry Regiment
7th Aus Div Cav Regiment
2/15 Punjab Battalion
45th Recce Regiment
XV Indian Corps
23rd Indian Mountain Gun Regiment
21st Indian Mountain Gun Regiment
6th Medium Regiment

Defending units:
18th Division
3rd Air Division
44th Field AA Battalion


The AA Bn is destroyed, and the 18th Div and the air HQ retreats WEST into the marshes as we have a strong force at Pegu! These foprces are now trapped and will be in no state to do anything.... ever!

A great result, Tony has orchestrated this battle brilliantly.

DEI
WE hit Koepang again with a CL TF:

Naval bombardment of Koepang at 68,116

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Japanese aircraft losses
No Japanese losses

Allied Ships
CL Newcastle
CL Mauritius
CL Hobart
DD Electra
DD Arrow
DD Tjerk Hiddes
DD Van Galen
DD Isaac Sweers

Japanese ground losses:
29 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 1 destroyed, 0 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled



Airbase hits 11
Airbase supply hits 3
Runway hits 153
Port hits 3
Port fuel hits 1


They are now headed to Darwin to marry up with an AKE to rearm and refuel. Love those 12 6" CL's!

Philippines
Despite being bombed from the air, and after two more days of desparete fighting we finally win at Zamboanga.

Ground combat at Zamboanga (75,89)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 1946 troops, 30 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 113

Defending force 481 troops, 4 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 1

Allied adjusted assault: 21

Japanese adjusted defense: 1

Allied assault odds: 21 to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), disruption(-), preparation(-), fatigue(-)
experience(-), supply(-)
Attacker: disruption(-)

Japanese ground losses:
1215 casualties reported
Squads: 45 destroyed, 30 disabled
Non Combat: 36 destroyed, 30 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 9 (8 destroyed, 1 disabled)
Units destroyed 1



Assaulting units:
73rd PA Infantry Regiment
101st PA Infantry Division
3rd PI Base Force
4th PI Base Force

Defending units:
86th Naval Guard Unit



SWPAC
Quiet apart from sub action. Should have started unloading at Madang this turn. Lae makes lvl 2 Afld, Aru lvl 3 Port.

The enemy base of Morotai shows a lvl 2 Port being made.

SOPAC
Forces are still moving into Rabaul. Moving troops around to Shortlands and Tulagi, while pulling forces out of Luganville.

CENTPAC

Quiet. Unloading supply at TB. Forces are preping for attacks on islands in the Marshalls.

NORPAC
The usual. The BB tf is ready to run in, but I may try and get the transports in the Kuriles detected by SIGINT and subs instead...

China
around 150 aircraft bomb Kanhsein, then the shock attacks go in...


Ground combat at Kanhsien (81,57)

Japanese Shock attack

Attacking force 33168 troops, 278 guns, 304 vehicles, Assault Value = 1001

Defending force 25441 troops, 124 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 636

Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 2

Japanese adjusted assault: 751

Allied adjusted defense: 400

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 1 (fort level 2)

Japanese Assault reduces fortifications to 2

Combat modifiers
Defender: forts(+), experience(-)
Attacker: shock(+)

Japanese ground losses:
857 casualties reported
Squads: 30 destroyed, 33 disabled
Non Combat: 23 destroyed, 60 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 4 disabled
Vehicles lost 71 (15 destroyed, 56 disabled)


Allied ground losses:
3027 casualties reported
Squads: 94 destroyed, 53 disabled
Non Combat: 128 destroyed, 78 disabled
Engineers: 5 destroyed, 5 disabled


Ground combat at Kanhsien (81,57)

Japanese Shock attack

Attacking force 32208 troops, 278 guns, 284 vehicles, Assault Value = 953

Defending force 22788 troops, 124 guns, 0 vehicles, Assault Value = 565

Japanese engineers reduce fortifications to 1

Japanese adjusted assault: 627

Allied adjusted defense: 453

Japanese assault odds: 1 to 1 (fort level 1)

Japanese Assault reduces fortifications to 1

Combat modifiers
Defender: leaders(+), experience(-)
Attacker: shock(+)

Japanese ground losses:
1391 casualties reported
Squads: 34 destroyed, 52 disabled
Non Combat: 30 destroyed, 41 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 3 disabled
Vehicles lost 47 (34 destroyed, 13 disabled)


Allied ground losses:
1399 casualties reported
Squads: 8 destroyed, 91 disabled
Non Combat: 12 destroyed, 172 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 8 disabled


They appear to be low on supply as tpt aircraft are hit by AA as they fly in.

Not sure how much longer we can hold... not long I suspect!

Over Changsha Oscar sweeps are met by the recently increased fighter force (Vanguard squadrons!) a couple of planes are lost on both sides.



AE BETA Breaker
User avatar
CaptBeefheart
Posts: 2623
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2003 2:42 am
Location: Seoul, Korea

RE: Aussies vs Amis - World Defence(no Joe or Nik)

Post by CaptBeefheart »

Your opponent really seems to have botched Burma, losing a division and sundry troops like that in Rangoon (or soon to be lost). As someone said above, you guys have caused them to ignore their counterattack opportunities, and there must have been some in Burma. Well played by you and Tony. And I just noticed you have the 41st ID there. That must have taken some time to ship, eh?

Cheers,
CC
Beer, because barley makes lousy bread.
jrcar
Posts: 2301
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2002 3:16 pm
Location: Seymour, Australia

RE: Aussies vs Amis - World Defence(no Joe or Nik)

Post by jrcar »

The 41st was shipped "early" via the long way... a tough call be we decided early to comit the two Aussie divs and a US Div to CBI theatre, and in return to comit two UK divs to the defence of Darwin... I feel that that swap would have been politically acceptable in real life. Early on we decided not to be active in the CENTPAC, or even the SOPAC.

Those 3 extra div make a big difference, in part because we can afford for them to take casulties (unlike the UK/Indian Divs).

As usual Nik and Joe have under estimated the forces they needed (Adak, and now Zamboanga also examples!).

They now have 3 divs and a regiment (including the 2 Div at Adak) out of action/destroyed, and the odds are definately in our favour now...

Planning for operation TIGER is now increasing, expecting to launch late Dec early jan 1943... It will co-incide with other actions in the SWPAC and CENTPAC.

Cheers

Rob
AE BETA Breaker
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”