Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post descriptions of your brilliant victories and unfortunate defeats here.

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

User avatar
BrucePowers
Posts: 12090
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 6:13 pm

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by BrucePowers »

Go with the last one........[:D]
For what we are about to receive, may we be truly thankful.

Lieutenant Bush - Captain Horatio Hornblower by C S Forester
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 16760
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by Mike Solli »

25 Army mission:
 
I'm going to do a recon in force of Ceylon.  The objective is to destroy all of the ground units that are on that island.  I'll probably leave one division equivalent as a garrison.  Maybe not.  I haven't decided yet.  There will be 4 divisions involved in this operation.  The operation will be supported by the 22 Air Flotilla and part of the 3 Air Division.  Baby KB will be available.  I'm toying with moving Akagi/Kaga there as support as well.  If I do, the the rest of KB will remain in the Pacific (probably Kwajalein) to defend against any of Ted's funny ideas there.
 
I have a large quantity of transports in Singapore right now.  I won't begin this until the following occur:
 
1. KB returns from it's current Brisbane-Noumea operation and moves to Kwajalein.
2. Akagi/Kaga move from Kwajalein to Singapore.
3. Baby KB is no longer needed off Northern Australia.
4. I gather enough transport for the invasion.
5. Much of the surface elements for the Australian invasion are no longer needed.
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 16760
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by Mike Solli »

ORIGINAL: BrucePowers

Go with the last one........[:D]

Got it! Thanks, Bruce!
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by witpqs »

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

Something interesting happened that I can't explain.  There are a bunch of air units belonging to restricted commands in the Home Islands.  For the most part they train pilots.  I had 2 IJN air units spontaneously change from a restricted command to independent!  No clue how it happened.  Does anyone have any idea?

I've had the opposite happen to me.
User avatar
Mynok
Posts: 12108
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2002 12:12 am
Contact:

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by Mynok »


Did they change size too? Perhaps slated for use on a CVE or something arriving soon?
"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by witpqs »

In my case groups that came off of a ship as Independent picked up the local restricted command.
Djordje
Posts: 537
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2004 10:49 am

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by Djordje »

ORIGINAL: witpqs

In my case groups that came off of a ship as Independent picked up the local restricted command.

What patch are you using? This is old known problem that michaelm said was fixed.

Anyway the problem can easily be avoided when you know what is causing it - avoid rail transfer of independent squadrons. When squadron goes off-map for one or more turns game engine does not allow HQ to be independent, so when it returns to the map next turn it assigns it HQ of the base it is in.
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by witpqs »

ORIGINAL: Djordje

ORIGINAL: witpqs

In my case groups that came off of a ship as Independent picked up the local restricted command.

What patch are you using? This is old known problem that michaelm said was fixed.

Anyway the problem can easily be avoided when you know what is causing it - avoid rail transfer of independent squadrons. When squadron goes off-map for one or more turns game engine does not allow HQ to be independent, so when it returns to the map next turn it assigns it HQ of the base it is in.

It happened months ago, likely Patch 2 but maybe 3.
Djordje
Posts: 537
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2004 10:49 am

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by Djordje »

Once it happens only thing you can do is change HQ to existing unrestricted one. There is no difference between independent and other HQs as far as I know
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 16760
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by Mike Solli »

19 Apr 42

Australia

I took Broome today. The Wyndham invasion force reached Wyndham, but I had it set to do not unload. Figures....

KB

Ah yes, KB, the terror of the Pacific. They couldn't hit 3 DDs, but they only sent 11 Vals to do the job. They did send 23 Kates after 2 AMs and sank both of them. [8|] Nothing else in sight. Looks like it'll be a bust.

Magwe

The Oscars decided not to fly today, even though they're stationed at Magwe. Ted sent only fighters, the AVG to be exact. The final score was 3 Zeros (only one pilot fortunately) to 4 H81-A3s.

Overall, a lackluster day.
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 16760
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by Mike Solli »

ORIGINAL: Djordje

Once it happens only thing you can do is change HQ to existing unrestricted one. There is no difference between independent and other HQs as far as I know

I have no problem with independent units. It's actually nice because they converted from a restricted command to an unrestricted command. They're still remaining as training units though.
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 16760
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by Mike Solli »

20 Apr 42

Miscellaneous Ship Losses

The xAK that was in the Wyndham invasion force sank today. In addition, I had an xAKL explode today. Oops. Someone was smoking in the wrong place. Fortunately, it was only a Daigen class.

Wyndham

The invasion force decided to land today.

KB

Ah yes, KB. Bad things happen when the supreme commander gives dopey commands. [:@] It started out well. I had continued south in the hopes of running into the DDs and doing something useful. Those guys have vanished. I thought, to myself, why not hedge my bets and let KB do something useful even if I don't find the DDs. I set all of the Vals and Kates to Naval attack with a secondary mission of Port Attack (Brisbane). Well, they found a nice juicy cargo ship TF. After two attacks 4 xAKs (big ones!) were confirmed sunk with 12 more damaged. I suspect at least 4-6 of those will go down. Great! KB did something sort of useful with no losses. Well, Nagumo read my order and sent a third strike at the port of Brisbane, 41 Vals escorted by 8 (yeah 8) Zeros. They ran into a buzzsaw of ~40 Allied fighters. The Zeros were overwhelmed losing 1 to a few Allied fighters. Then they tore into the Vals. Final results were 24 shot down with more lost as op losses. Overall Shokaku lost 14 Val pilots KIA/MIA and 2 more wounded. Zuikaku lost a Zero pilot MIA and 15 Val pilots KIA/MIA. The only consolation is that I have a lot of pilots in the reserve to replace them. Doesn't make that swift idea any less stupid though. There still are a lot of ships in that TF out there, many damaged. I'm heading south one more day (and away from Brisbane) to try to catch them again. After that, I'm going to swing past Noumea to see if there's anything hiding around there. I also have 2 subs in the area headed for that beat up TF. Oh yeah, I sank an AMc in Brisbane. [8|]

Edit: The I-3 sank an xAK off San Franciso. It had been a while since I place any subs out there. Now I have 8 dedicated to the US West Coast. Four at a time. They'll swap out every couple of weeks. I'm also placing sub divisions (3-4 subs each) around various important Allied ports. I'm trying to force Ted to escort everything. That makes fewer escorts for his warships.
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 16760
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by Mike Solli »

21 Apr 42

Another quiet day. Ted decided not to send fighters over Magwe. I think I depleted his fighter reserves. Heh, heh. Maybe he's just resting. He has taken serious losses for no appreciable result there. The CA TF will bombard Akyab the day after tomorrow.

KB ran into 2 xAKs, litterally. In the morning they sank them. KB will now head toward Noumea to see if there's anything around there.

I took Wyndham. Next on the agenda is Darwin. I'm concerned about invading there though. Intel says there's 14 units and 40k troops. What do you guys think?
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
User avatar
bilbow
Posts: 740
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2002 6:26 am
Location: Concord NH

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by bilbow »

Do you know where the Aussies of the 6th and 7th divs are located? They could be in Darwin, and would be if I were him.
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile- hoping it will eat him last
- Winston Churchill
User avatar
TheLoneGunman_MatrixForum
Posts: 312
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:01 pm

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by TheLoneGunman_MatrixForum »

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

I took Wyndham. Next on the agenda is Darwin. I'm concerned about invading there though. Intel says there's 14 units and 40k troops. What do you guys think?

If he's got that many troops at Darwin, he's keeping them supplied by sea. I'd recommend doing some major sea lane interdiction in the area while you continue with your recon to make sure your intel is correct.

Such a large concentration of troops in one spot could be disastrous for him if you can manage to figure out a way to kill them off.
User avatar
PaxMondo
Posts: 11276
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:23 pm

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by PaxMondo »

ORIGINAL: TheLoneGunman

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

I took Wyndham. Next on the agenda is Darwin. I'm concerned about invading there though. Intel says there's 14 units and 40k troops. What do you guys think?

If he's got that many troops at Darwin, he's keeping them supplied by sea. I'd recommend doing some major sea lane interdiction in the area while you continue with your recon to make sure your intel is correct.

Such a large concentration of troops in one spot could be disastrous for him if you can manage to figure out a way to kill them off.

I've been able to supply by land quite a large force in Darwin. However, you may have HR's against the push/pull supply. However, I would agree that it is likely that sea supply is at least a partial component to keep 14 large units supplied in Darwin.
Pax
User avatar
Cribtop
Posts: 3890
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 1:42 pm
Location: Lone Star Nation

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by Cribtop »

Facing 14 units I would at a minimum reconsider the plan to directly amphib assault the place. I'd interdict by sea and launch a few ground attack bombing raids just to get a list of units present. Then decide how to take Darwin, perhaps by the overland route you originally planned.
Image
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 16760
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by Mike Solli »

I don't know where the 6th & 7th Aussie Divisions are. Good idea of the ground bombing raid. I'll try that next turn to get some intel. That's a great idea. I'm leaning toward landing the force at Wyndham and taking the road. 14 Army will turn north toward Darwin and 16 Army will form a defensive line to the south.
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 16760
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by Mike Solli »

22 Apr 42

Australia

That damn Boise showed up and sank a small invasion TF headed for Pt. Hedland, composed of 2 PBs and 2 xAKs. It was carrying a Naval Guard unit, one of the ones that teams with a port unit to create a Special Base Force. The intent was to take Pt. Hedland and then withdraw it back to Koepang to form the SBF. Well, now that it's gone, I can upgrade without it. I can rebuild all of the infantry that was destroyed. It was a loss, but not a bad one. I suspect Boise came from the west. I never saw her and I don't have anything in that area. That has been rectified. I also sent the 4 BBs to hang out in that area in case she returns.

Sub War

The I-15 put down an xAK east of Hawaii with 3 torpedoes.

KB

KB headed to an area west of Noumea looking for some more meat. They didn't find anything. I sent KB on a route to the south of Noumea heading east. I'll check out that area and then head for home.
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
User avatar
Mike Solli
Posts: 16760
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2000 8:00 am
Location: the flight deck of the Zuikaku

RE: Here we go again! tc464 (A) vs. Mike (J) - No tc464

Post by Mike Solli »

23 Apr 42

Burma

We keep taking turns battering each other. This time he won. I lost a dozen Oscars and 6 pilots for about half a dozen Allied losses. Unfortunately, he closed the airfield at Magwe. I pulled out the beat up Oscar Sentai and didn't replace it this time. I have more air support units arriving in theater. Soon, I'll have airfields with fighters all over the area. I think that's the key.

The CA TF bombarded Akyab in a night bombardment. I used the suggestion to have floatplanes recon and I am convinced they made the bombardment a great one. The CL hit the 18 Br Div and the 2 CAs hit the town. Overall, there were 316 casualties and at least 1 Warhawk was destroyed on the ground. Best of all was that fires were started. The bombardment said 316 fires, but when I put the cursor on Akyab, it showed 44 fires. Is that a lot? What will it do to the base?

Summatra

I took Sabang. Now I own all of the bases along the NW coast of Summatra.

I have a strong force in Palembang. I could take it now but I'm waiting for the 3 engineer regiments to arrive to reduce the possibility of trashing the joint.

I also took Djambi with a Tank regiment. I captured the oil field there at 245(5)!

US West Coast

The I-2 obliterated the PC Jackson. [:D]

Australia

There are small TFs (1-2 ships each) arriving at Darwin constantly. They're coming from the east. I'm putting surface forces there and will station subs in the area as well. Not sure where they're coming from though. Baby KB caught an xAKL and sank her in Darwin.

KB

Well, KB hit the convoy route mother lode! They found 3 cargo convoys heading toward Australia, so they were full! In 3 attacks they hit a total of 13 xAKs and 6 xAKLs. Five xAKs and 3 xAKLs were confirmed sunk and all of the rest had multiple 250kg bomb hits and heavy fires and heavy damage. I lost count of the number of times I heard the sinking ship sounds during the turn. KB will head east next turn looking for fresh game then will turn north on the east side of Noumea to head for the replenishment fleet rendezvous and then for Truk. Still a couple of turns left before they are out of danger, but there's been no inkling of Allied carriers. So far they have sunk 12 cargo ships and badly damaged/sunk another 24 cargo ships. I know that in the long run, it's meaningless, but for the short term, it'll slow down the build-up in Australia.
Image
Created by the amazing Dixie
Post Reply

Return to “After Action Reports”